Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Cars and Transportation' started by Bebop, Jun 13, 2018.
Elon Musk chosen to build, operate O'Hare express dubbed 'Tesla-in-a-tunnel'
Just Wow. If they can pull this off and actually do it, it bodes well for future projects of this kind.
From a seemingly non-serious tweet a couple of years ago announcing The Boring Company to today's announcement.
I can't believe this actually happened. It makes total financial sense why Chicago chose them, but assuming final negotiations are successful, this will put yet another huge bull's eye on Elon Musk's back.
It probably helps that TBC is privately owned.
Fast and efficient connections to airports are the norm for globally connected cities in Europe, and increasingly in Asia. A rail-link between downtown Chicago and O'Hare does exist, this would simply be a lot faster.
My first take: great, hope Boring can make this work at that price.
Second take: what I really like is the size of the [non-hyperloop] driverless pods based on the Model X. Leveraging established mass production for low cost, and good for frequency.
And I hope this format encourages Tesla to one day offer them as relatively cheap, high frequency above-ground alternative to trams and buses, with clearly delineated virtual tracks as guidance, possibly on a separate right-of-way.
Third take: noone talks about what Chicago's geology is like. Two tunnels of 17 miles length amounts to nearly $30m per mile, which is cheaper than all get out. And that doesn't include dealing with substation rehab/construction, where plenty of officialdom / building codes / local businesses get involved.
The funny part: thinking of all the gigantic tunnels that have been built all over the world, it can be amusing to read a comment like "...the tunnel essentially impervious to caving in.”
Another source: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20180613/BLOGS02/180619933?template=printart
An example of what's going on outside the US:
It only seemed not serious because:
1) It had a jocular tone
2) people hadn't paid attention to how much he talked about tunnels
3) people didn't consider how important it would be to making a Martian colony
They risk the opportunity cost of failure, but otherwise avoid what you know would be an expensive project subject to cost and time overruns anyway. Boring gets a very real project with which to work on the technology.
The Electrek article had a quote from someone who said a company called Destiny something or other produced a video of the proposed system that blew everyone away. Anyone know where to find said video?
Later on in the future, I’m excited about the possibilities of creating more branches off this main line.
Would love to one day see a scenario where maybe something like The Metra gets replaced for transport from the suburbs to the city. Would be amazing. Way faster access and more frequent time options.
I am anxious to see governments around the world start considering a global hyperloop system. Gene Roddenberry's made for TV movie Genesis II describes a vacuum tube magnetic levitated high speed train that covered the entire globe. Here is an excerpt from Genesis II Wikipedia:
An elaborate "Subshuttle" subterranean rapid transit system was constructed during the 1970s, due to the vulnerability of air transportation to attack. The Subshuttles utilized a magnetic levitation rail system. They operated inside vactrain tunnels and ran at hundreds of miles per hour. The tunnel network was comprehensive enough to cover the entire globe. The PAX organization inherited the still-working system and used it to dispatch their teams of troubleshooters.
So Gene Roddenberry has given us his vision of the Hyperloop like train and starships back in the 70s around the same time we had a moon mission and 2001 Space Odyssey was filmed. I would say Evan has been here at least since the early 60s.
Interesting to note that the apparent signs around the seating area look like monoliths. Perhaps its getting close to the time for us to evolve again.
This makes the CTA look like garbage. So futuristic looking. I love the concept.
Gotta get ahead of Gary the snail!
Gary is likely to evolve faster too.
That’s a great link and look. Thanks for posting it.
Would give many items of great value for a glimpse into the Loop network 20 years hence.
8 rows (one off to right of shot) of 6 skates, so got to find the skate which is "my ride" within that lot. Its like my partner leaving the car in the car park and just handing me the keys - except Tesla APP will find it, and I can flash lights / honk horn when I get close ... except, also, that that's above ground and my phone has GPS. Takes up a lot of space, underground, for that "station" too. The last of those 48 cars won't be leaving for 24 minutes either ...
I would have thought a series of numbered bus stops, by the curb, and a vehicle comes to you would be less walking / hunting. I love the whole "express to destination" design, but I'm struggling with how Tesla groups 16 riders into a group to fill a skate to capacity, as often as possible. I suppose making a couple of stops en route is fine, so perhaps the 16 only have to be travelling in the same general direction.
Maybe just have skates identified as going to each terminal station / route, like a bus, in which case you just need one "bus stop" per route, and when 16 people have got into it, or when the first passenger has been waiting long enough, off it goes
Pre-booking a skate, and turning up a couple of minutes late, would be a nuisance/delay for fellow travellers, so presumably it will be "skate provided when you arrive", or book a skate but then use my phone APP to detect when I have got into the elevator and started descending, and then start figuring out which skate has capacity, and is nearby, and will be my ride. More of an issue when embarking at intermediate stations than terminus.
I wonder if key buildings in big cities will be vying (paying even?) for a station under their building, reached by an elevator from within their building? Maybe every skyscraper in the street will have a station/elevator?
Chicago - O'Hare is the same distance as Heathrow-London (Paddington) [16 miles] and the Heathrow Express trains are capable of 100 MPH but still take 16 minutes to make the journey, whereas Tesla is talking about 25% less time
For the initial system, it is single point to single point, so they are all your skate.
For multi-point systems, the system is demand based, so there is no 'your' skate, or predetermined schedule/ routue, till you get there with a destination selected. Then your phone/ signage directs you. Signage and skates can be aware of your position via BLE and GPS.
My view of concept:
Boring App on phone.
Arrive at station
Signage guides you to pod lane
Pod signage tells destination (no intermediate stops)
Get on, ride, get off. Auto billed.
This can work due to automation, large pool of skates (which can cruise the tracks when not needed or hang out in a garage), and non-blocking ingres/egress points.
Basically this is just an underground electric bus system. Not sure whats wrong with a plain old train with LYFT auto driving Tesla cars or buses at each station to take people to their destinations. Trains can move a lot more people than individual skates or buses. Arteries of of trains with auto driving cars or buses serving as the capillaries of the system to get people to their destinations would make more sense to me. Maybe if I saw the route map the skate concept might be more clear.. I would suggest trying out the skate concept in one small city before implementing in a big city as a trial.and error. A single train track can move 10,000 people per hour. A large bus station can only move a small fraction of that and takes up alot more room. Disney relies on the monorail to move millions of people.
Penn station moves 600,000 people per day or 1000 people every minute. That's more than JFK, Laguardia and Newark terminals combined which takes up 100 times the area of Penn station. Something to consider. That's why the Hyperloop train makes so much sense to me.
I’m a bit confused by this venture. Why build an underground tunnel to only have a capacity of a little more than 1000 passengers per hour? Modern metros can be anywhere up to are 30-40k in each direction and are not really that much slower over these short distances. A handful of 767s landing per hour and passengers spilling onto the Boring Line and it will be full. What makes this better than a train?
Secondly, in the European market one of the biggest costs of underground tunnelling for mass transit is the need for escape / service shafts every 500m-1000m. What’s proposed here? You’ll see on YouTube a great docco all about London’s Crossrail project and the pains they’ve taken to prevent surface structures being affected by the tunnelling below. This needed countless vertical shafts to be dug in the city centre so grouting could be injected into the ground. All of this needs complicated and expensive work sites in the middle of the city. Is the difference all in Chicago’s geology? Safety regs? What am I missing?
A few differentiators.
Trains carry everybody to all the stops, whether they are going there or not. That is fine in a pure single point to single point system , but when you have a system that has tens or hundreds of stops, the trip either takes a longer time, or require switching at stations.
Trains/ monorail don't have side tracks for load/unload, nor the ability to skip stops no one is going to be getting on/off.
Elon is working to advance sustainable transportation. People driver v.s. use public transport due to overall trip speed and convenience. Loop gives the convenience of your own schedule and your own destination along with a known trip time due to no stops or traffic.
A train itself is more people dense that individual cars, but you then also have unused track between the train and the next one based on schedule (say 5 minutes of track at 30 MPH or 13,200 ft ). With the skates, you can have a higher people per mile of track metric.
Going from your 10,000 people an hour number. A train every 5 minutes is 500 people per train. or one person every 26 feet. Skates spaced 200 feet apart would need to average 8 people per skate to achieve the same track density.
In actual use, the skates could have less gap between them, average 2-4 times the speed due to no intermediate stops, and hold 16 people, giving a total boost of >6x in density. Equivalent to 500 person trains running faster than every minute.