Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Hyperloop

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
+Thats got to be so inefficient. You are basically pushing 1000's of tonnes of air 100's of miles for no reason for 90%+ of the time. Better to have a pneumatic system with an evacuated tube - even that would be highly energyintensive and crazily expensive. I'm hoping that Elon has some innovation in manufacturing or in the cost of the system up his sleeve that will make a High Speed system more efficient - lateral thinking rather like Tesla has done with the superchargers, but he stated that the system was an open one and he was not thinking of commercializing it, so it is likely to be fantastic but commercially unrealistic
 
The other-next Elon Musk Adventure - the "Hyperloop"

Supersonic electric plane, the fifth-mode "Hyperloop"... what'll be next?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pRB_aG5b-E


I have recently stated that I cannot think of a better company to work in than TESLA, but thinking of these other two... I'm not so sure anymore...

Dear Elon, if you're reading this, here's an experienced Project Manager for you...
wink.gif
 
I'm surprised they didn't illustrate the idea that you could load an individual pod/capsule with a personal vehicle (for now existing cars but eventually more specialized EVs). In loading a personal vehicle on a pod, when you get from LA to New York in 45 minutes, you'll actually be able to drive around on the "capillary" roads. This system can completely eliminate all freeways and would be astronomically beneficial environmentally and in costs of personal and commercial transportation... $100 to get to NY, groceries cost less due to greatly reduced distribution costs.

Since the pods are propelled through a computer controlled magnetic "platform", there aren't fixed rails so you could potentially have wider sections that branch off to slower local loops and eventually "stations" where the personal vehicle are ejected and take surface roads to reach the final destination. Any perceived disadvantages compared to current highway systems are dwarfed into a non-issue due to the insanely huge time/cost/enegy savings and other benefits.
 
In the Teslive Q&A, he said up to 1000 miles.

I was wondering about that, since it should always be possible to combine multiple segments (and still be faster than an airplane).

Just for the record, here recent new info:

- combination of Concorde, railgun, and air hockey (the "Concorde" and "railgun" parts are older, and made me post here about an air cushion solution a long time ago, but the "air hockey" hint, I think, is new).

- suggested diameter of 2 meter
 
Another video "news" linking EM to ET3...

Link: Tesla Motors unveils transit system - YouTube

I put up an ET3 vid when we first started hearing about Hyperloop:
Hyperloop - Page 3
(Gee, that was over a year ago!)

But then EM tweeted this:
Twitter / elonmusk: Will publish something on the ...
...Not a vac tunnel btw...

But then mentioned ET3 at Teslive... So, are we talking vacuum or not? What if the air behind the capsule is pressurized instead. Similar concept but semantically different.

Anyways, it is almost comical how much speculation this has caused based on not saying a whole lot about it so far.
 
The the air moving in the same direction as the car is how air resistance is combated?

you could completely fill the tube with train... :)

but seriously, I was doing some thinking, and if you're going to build a tube, I can't see why you wouldn't evacuate the tube.
The tube walls need to be a little thicker to account for the air pressure, but it's really not that bad. I think a 6' diameter tunnel would need like 0.3" thick steel. The material for all of the steel for that to get from SF to LA would be around $1b, which is a rounding error on the $90b CA high speed rail project. and even if you didn't evacuate the tube, you'd still need some material.... The cost of evacuating the tube is also cheap.

(Personally, I think a 6' diameter tunnel is sufficient height. An automobile is way less than 6' tall, and folks don't complain about how uncomfortable they are. but even if you go to 10', the material cost is still only a couple billion).

If you're going to bother building a tube and dealing with all of the road crossing headaches involved in that, why would you try to move 1 atm air through the tube at 1000mph, or move a car through 1 atm at 1000mph? Either of those options is somewhat crazy compared to the cost of just reducing the air pressure inside the tube.

If you go full vacuum, you need some way to scrub CO2 out of the trains for the air breathing passengers, but at 0.1atm, you could probably just pull that air into the car, and you'd only have 10% of the losses you'd have at 1 atm.

If CA is going to put $90b into a rail project, it would be nice to get something out of the project other than a slower, more expensive way to get from SF to LA than via airplane
(more expensive if you remove government subsidies: if 10,000 people ride the train every day for 20 years, the cost per ride would be over $1k, even excluding operational&maintenance costs. If you assume that 100,000 people ride the train every day then the cost becomes more reasonable, but we currently don't have that many people riding planes between the cities, and planes are faster. 10,000 folks per day seems generous to me.)
 
If you go full vacuum, you need some way to scrub CO2 out of the trains for the air breathing passengers, but at 0.1atm, you could probably just pull that air into the car, and you'd only have 10% of the losses you'd have at 1 atm.
I'd go with one-way valves mounted over the whole tube and use the train itself as a pump. If there is enough air in the tube to offer 1 atm at the front of the train, the valves would open even before the train passes by and let out some of the excess pressure and close immediately after it drops below normal pressure (1atm).
If anything goes wrong, security valves would open and flood the tube with air slowing down the train.