HYPERLOOP in Canada

[Wintyr]

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/09/15/toronto-montreal-corridor-a-top-candidate-for-a-hyperloop_a_23210760/?utm_hp_ref=ca-homepage

 

 Looks like this thing is set to travel between Montreal and Toronto and looking to connect or add to the US cities. looks like that whole video Linus posted about hyperloop was indeed actually about more than just sensor research and was indeed about Travel methods and being done sooner than we all thought.  I think it's actually pretty cool and there will always be those who want to scare you about the dangers of using such a thing but the same was said about cars and plains and airships well mabey the airship one is a bad example but still.  now we just need a vertical hyperloop to take us to space.

[James]

Yes. Now to connect the prairies to the good places....

[James]

(originally from Edmonton)

[Damascus]

Eh, a Maglev train is magnitudes safer, cheaper, easier to maintain and only marginally slower.

[Zando_]

Oooo... but being stuck in a tunnel they sucked the air out of is scary... just like going in that big tunnel under the I-forgot-the-name-why-didn't-I-learn-anything-in-school channel between the UK and France. Because if your transport device break, bye bye you. BUT YOU CAN GO FAST! 

 

And it's safer than a wing suit, so mebbe it's worth it. 

[Zando_]

Just now, Damascus said:

Eh, a Maglev train is magnitudes safer, cheaper, easier to maintain and only marginally slower.

Yes. Just build lots of those. They do use a lot of power for all the magnets, but they also easily go 200+ mph. 

[Terryv]

12 minutes ago, Damascus said:

Eh, a Maglev train is magnitudes safer, cheaper, easier to maintain and only marginally slower.

We have no idea about safety, don't make those claims without evidence.

Marginal speed increase? Hyperloop is estimated to have a cruising speed of about 600mph and top speed of 760mph once fully implemented.

 

The initial 220 mph test was early in development with 300+mph tests coming.

 

 

[TheRandomness]

23 minutes ago, Zando Bob said:

Oooo... but being stuck in a tunnel they sucked the air out of is scary... just like going in that big tunnel under the I-forgot-the-name-why-didn't-I-learn-anything-in-school channel between the UK and France. Because if your transport device break, bye bye you. BUT YOU CAN GO FAST! 

 

And it's safer than a wing suit, so mebbe it's worth it. 

The channel tunnel is limited to 100mph.

[Zando_]

3 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

The channel tunnel is limited to 100mph.

Oh. Boring. Why not a maglev then, they go way faster. 

[TheRandomness]

Just now, Zando Bob said:

Oh. Boring. Why not a maglev then, they go way faster. 

Because when you're under a large mass of water, going through a tunnel, going faster isn't necessarily better.

[Zando_]

Just now, TheRandomness said:

Because when you're under a large mass of water, going through a tunnel, going faster isn't necessarily better.

Lol. I got mixed up, I thought you meant the hyper loop was limited to 100mph. Though why wouldn't you want to go faster through the tunnel? Wouldn't that get you through faster, minimizing the time spent underwater?

[Teddy07]

The youtuber Thunderf00t (physicist) extensively covered the Hyperloop. He is a huge critic of it.

[Monkey Dust]

There is a whole raft of challenges that need to be overcome, like maintaining a vacuum in a tube over such a long distance, corners, and being able to carry enough people/cargo to make it financially viable. The last one being the really big one. It will require a lot of infrastructure, bridges, tunnels and access for maintenance. Land will have to be purchased, an absolutely huge amount of land. Just because something is the fastest doesn't mean people will pay a huge premium to make it financially viable, note how Concorde hasn't been replaced.

 

At the risk of sounding like a Luddite, I don't think Hyperloop will ever successfully launch a service. I reckon the future is faster planes, the infrastructure is already there, but the jet engine may need to be retired.        

[TheRandomness]

2 minutes ago, Zando Bob said:

Lol. I got mixed up, I thought you meant the hyper loop was limited to 100mph. Though why wouldn't you want to go faster through the tunnel? Wouldn't that get you through faster, minimizing the time spent underwater?

Tunnel boom (creating a shockwave of air going through the tunnel, caused by a train entering quickly) repeatedly would end up eventually straining and cracking the concrete.

[Monkey Dust]

2 minutes ago, Zando Bob said:

Lol. I got mixed up, I thought you meant the hyper loop was limited to 100mph. Though why wouldn't you want to go faster through the tunnel? Wouldn't that get you through faster, minimizing the time spent underwater?

I'm going to guess air pressure building up in front of the train.

[Lathlaer]

32 minutes ago, Teddy07 said:

The youtuber Thunderf00t (physicist) extensively covered the Hyperloop. He is a huge critic of it.

Some of the eingineers working on Hyperloop One addressed his videos. Nothing specific and to be honest a bit underwhelming, I had hoped for something that would make me a believer in the project. Basically all they said is "we are better engineers and we know what we are doing" without addressing specifics.

 

Since Elon Musk seems preocuppied with several expensive high profile projects he started and hasn't finished yet, I don't really believe that he can push Hyperloop so that it returns on the right track. I am not following HL news very thoroughly but I have yet to see some promising tests that really matter (as in, actuall high speed tests in tubes, even if on smaller scale and in controlled conditions).

 

[Damascus]

44 minutes ago, Terryv said:

We have no idea about safety, don't make those claims without evidence.

Marginal speed increase? Hyperloop is estimated to have a cruising speed of about 600mph and top speed of 760mph once fully implemented.

 

The initial 220 mph test was early in development with 300+mph tests coming.

 

 

We have an excellent idea about safety, they've been in use for decades.  I'll take a Maglev that fits 200-800 people over a hyperloop that fits 50 tops but goes 3x faster and could kill every one inside if there is a breach.  In the case of Toronto to montreal it would be insane to run a hyperloop, the terrain is highly irregular making even highways relatively difficult - especially when compared to the desert the first hyperloop is being built for.

[MoonSpot]

Who cares about T-dot to Montreal?  What needs to happen is several shorter runs from the areas surrounding Toronto to Toronto city center.  If they can help the hundreds of thousands get to and from work in Toronto EVERY DAY, thats much better than saving time for the odd business trip folk.  Its not like its their tax dollars that'll get sucked up to build it.

Canadumb, always missing what needs to be addressed.

[Wintyr]

3 hours ago, TheRandomness said:

Tunnel boom (creating a shockwave of air going through the tunnel, caused by a train entering quickly) repeatedly would end up eventually straining and cracking the concrete.

do they have to use concrete mabey some fancy space aged metal or composite of some sort

[Mihle]

10 minutes ago, MoonSpot said:

Who cares about T-dot to Montreal?  What needs to happen is several shorter runs from the areas surrounding Toronto to Toronto city center.  If they can help the hundreds of thousands get to and from work in Toronto EVERY DAY, thats much better than saving time for the odd business trip folk.  Its not like its their tax dollars that'll get sucked up to build it.

Canadumb, always missing what needs to be addressed.

Time saved wouldnt be much at short distances, especially when it cant even get up to full speed.

[TheRandomness]

23 minutes ago, Wintyr said:

do they have to use concrete mabey some fancy space aged metal or composite of some sort

Concrete is used because it's inexpensive and easily accessible. Also, it's proven to last a long, long time. Whereas fibreglass/carbon fibre wouldn't really put up to the stresses of it.

[MoonSpot]

36 minutes ago, Mihle said:

Time saved wouldnt be much at short distances, especially when it cant even get up to full speed.

A few minutes saved for thousands trumps a couple hours for a few dozen.  Also, the area surrounding Toronto which people commute from is immense.  If they can't get up to the quoted top speed of 100mph in 50-100km, then its an even more feeble system than I imagined.

[Kobathor]

4 hours ago, Terryv said:

We have no idea about safety, don't make those claims without evidence.

 

*One terrorist takes .30-06 rifle and shoots Hyperloop*

Giant tube under a vacuum. Great idea! Immensely expensive and impractical.

[Damascus]

10 minutes ago, MoonSpot said:

A few minutes saved for thousands trumps a couple hours for a few dozen.  Also, the area surrounding Toronto which people commute from is immense.  If they can't get up to the quoted top speed of 100mph in 50-100km, then its an even more feeble system than I imagined.

Actually, the idea solution for Toronto (and most cities) is a near silent raised monorail system.  The nature of the system allows for a great deal of flexibility in dealing with existing structures, allowing the train to stay near or above established artery highways and go directly to city centers from suburbia.  

 

On top of that, each train could easily take 100+ people per cars times 3 or 4 cars  (a hyperloop pod can do 25-50 max) allowing the cost of the tickets to be as low as any other public transit system, likely piggybacking off the existing transpo infrastructure. 

 

Immediate short and long term usefulness + revenue to pay for itself while also easing vehicular conjestion and usage.

 

Win/win/win

[MoonSpot]

30 minutes ago, Damascus said:

Actually, the idea solution for Toronto (and most cities) is a near silent raised monorail system.  The nature of the system allows for a great deal of flexibility in dealing with existing structures, allowing the train to stay near or above established artery highways and go directly to city centers from suburbia.  

 

On top of that, each train could easily take 100+ people per cars times 3 or 4 cars  (a hyperloop pod can do 25-50 max) allowing the cost of the tickets to be as low as any other public transit system, likely piggybacking off the existing transpo infrastructure. 

 

Immediate short and long term usefulness + revenue to pay for itself while also easing vehicular conjestion and usage.

 

Win/win/win

I don't necessarily agree or disagree.  But if the focus (aka money) gets shifted to improving transportation for daily working class commuters istead of fantasizing, then that'll be a good start.  And an actual responsible use of tax dollars.