😅 Before I realised they CGI everything, I really thought they were making headway, especially after I saw them test it on real people. About 8 years later and exposure to all kinds of CGI, you can get an app on your phone that makes it look like you have real tears, or you're really wherever you want in the world, I now know better. Trust me they CGIed all of Australia. You're not an Ozzie are you?
They could solve a lot of these problems with some simple fixes. Capacity issues - make the pods longer, carrying more people. Distance needed between pods - link pods together and run several at a time. Can't take corners - run it a bit slower. Costs & technical difficulty of the vacuum - slower speeds mean it's not so important, make them aerodynamic. Costs of tunnelling or elevating - run them on the ground outside cities. Wait... that's starting to look familiar.
But hyperloop is fancy! Why go with boring, old reliable trains that have been around for centuries!? Look at all the 3D rendering we can do to sell you vaporware!
Honestly, all those things mentioned in the video can be achieved with A) An electrified high speed rail and B) Electrified freight trains. But yeah, I kinda forgot that the US is afraid of anything related to trains.
@@chefandmusician9170 not really. sure, usa is a large country, but most people live on coasts and that's where the network should begin. they aren't that large. especially in canada, most people live across a tiny strip near the border of usa, about the length of the UK but requires much less lines
The Hyperport is just stupid. The biggest container ships today can move up to 24'000 containers (with a mix of 20 and 40 feet). This means the hyperloop has to run 24 hours a day for eight and a half days straight to replace ONE ship. So let's say we transport goods across land. A typical European cargo train can carry about 60 containers. So to move 2'800 containers a day we need 47 trains. In the US trains run with even more containers, so you need even fewer trains, that run on existing infrastructure, with a system that is really stable and reliable in comparison. They are more energy efficient because they don't need vacuums and one locomotive hauls multiple cars and so on. The port of Hamburg, Europe's third largest harbour moves about 28'000 containers a day. Let's say 17000 of them need to be moved by trains or road, the rest goes with planes and other ships. This means we need SIX hyperports to move them. And all of that just so they can be fast, even if fast is pretty unimportant for many goods, reliability and cost-effectiveness on the other hand is very important.
@@lukabrown Reliability beats speed in freight transportation. Hyperloop needs vacuum to run that fast. If the infrastructure is damaged so that vacuum is no longer possible the whole line could stop. Repairing could take days or weeks.
Imagine if there was a better more feasible, pre-existing, and cost-effective (in comparison) transport technology that could become increasingly more innovated and has been shown to be highly effective. Oh, wait those are called trains. WE NEED MORE MONEY SPENT ON TRAINS lmao. I can see how Hyperloops in theory could be very beneficial. However, maybe we should figure out how to implement existing tech before we go spending millions on something that even the corporations coming up with this tech don't even know if they should continue.
Trains work very well -- in Europe, where they have pretty much always done passenger rail, and only do freight occasionally at night, usually on a separate track system from passenger. A big advantage they have over the US is that the track is owned by the state, and they lease the right to run trains over it. In the US our track is owned by individual companies, which will be dammed before they let someone else run on their track. Also, most of the infrastructure was built in the 19th century, and about 2/3rds of that decayed out of existence over the first 60+ years of the 20th century as the ICC did their best to destroy the rail companies, and damned near succeeded in their mission. The US rail companies are basically still in the 18th century as far as their mental concept of the world. For instance, it is accepted as a truism that you cannot schedule trains, because you never can tell when one will be ready to leave a yard, so you don't know when it will start occupying track. You also can't know how fast it will go, because that depends on the grades and the HP/ton ratio of the train, and the power planners generally aim for an average speed around 40MPH, IF the head-end equipment stays functional. In general it does not. Almost every train set starts with at least one axle off-line for reasons the crew generally can't determine themselves. Typically at least one engine will break down completely on any given freight run, slowing the train down to about 10MPH, if not completely stopped until the company can either sent out additional power to finish dragging it to some place, or commonly send out a repair truck that will try to get a few axles back online long enough to get the train moving again. This usually takes hours, with the dead train occupying track. This corporate mentality that all equipment should be only half-functional, and the idea that as a result you can't schedule trains, means that no existing track in the US could be used for scheduled passenger service. You will say that is exactly what Amtrak does. Yes, it has train schedules posted on the web site. It is a cold day in hell when one arrives on time at any station (outside the NE corridor, which is Amtrak's real purpose), and it is an even colder day that you can get from one place to another without delays. Even if they ran on time, it is one train a week, leaving from some dark place in some inner city where only gang members still exist, leaving at 3 AM, scheduled to arrive in some other inner city derelict building just after all transport shuts down. And there isn't much chance of them building stations where people are, because none of the existing track followed the migration patterns after the early 20th century. Given that and environmentalists and the EPA, the chance of them being able to build track or a station is zero.
@@lwilton these issues can only be solved by public perception, not by building proprietary track that is even less accessible than traditional railroads
High speed trains are already solving the problems that Hyperloop purports to address. You don't need subersonic speeds, or even be faster than aeroplanes, to have hyper efficient, high throughput transportation of goods and passengers. In terms of passenger throughput (passengers/hour), trains will always be an order of magnitude better than individual "pods", regardless of how fast the pods are.
I will forever be baffled as to why the US refuses to invest in more rail infrastructure. I visit Japan every summer for family and the railway system there is incredible. You can live in a nice quiet suburb and be in the city in 5-10 minutes via train for less than 3$s.
Yeah, freight. The thing that by and large needs to be transported so much faster than people. That's why freight trains and container ships are so popular. I'm sure creating an _incredibly_ expensive infrastructure will totally be worth it for the few items that need that speed.
Goods been in transport from China for 1 month, transported to next city in 12 hours instead of 24 hours, stored in stock for a month before it is sold
Exactly. Just unnecessary. And now think about the routes. Building a steel tube from China to the US / US to Europe? I don't think so, because you would have to build across a huge ocean. China to Europe? Currently unthinkable because of politics.
Vertical farming is the investment that will save humanity. Attach vertical farms to shops and give communities all the fresh produce they could ever need throughout every shoppable minute of the year.
4:24 I‘d like to emphasize that a single high speed train can already carry more than 1000 passengers. Easily. So Hyperloop, even by the most generous assumptions, would need a total of nine hours to carry what a regular high speed railway accomplishes in one. Who thought this was a good idea again?
Most HSTs around the world carry less people then that. I believe the average is around 580. But if you linked two Chinese HSTs fill them up to it’s maximum capacity you could fit more then a thousand people easily
@@MrJimheeren My reference was a single Velaro CN (CRH3D) which has 1060 seats on 400 meters. But even the significantly slimmer TGV Duplex would carry at least 1020 passengers. Both measure just 400 meters. And France is going to operate 18 TGV per hour on the LGV Est. So they'll outclass Hyperloop by about ten times. On 40 year old infrastructure that's actually held back by being classic compatible.
The Germans conceptualized it and gave up on it cause it was not feasible. They did however associate it with lunar bases. They then went towards the Maglev direction which was subsequently shutdown by an accident, though I’m sure the accident was used as an excuse to prevent breakaway technologies from being discovered 20 years ago.
"Who thought this was a good idea again?" The B1M/Tomorrow's Build team lol, they have been shilling it since the beginning and it doesn't look like they are going to stop any time soon.
Imagine if all the hype, money, press coverage, engineers and materials hadn't been spent on a literal pipe dream, instead being put into building and maybe even improving existing high speed rail.
Good in principle, but aside from all the big number hype, the actual money spent is about enough for a few tens of miles of track electrification and maybe a couple of extra train sets off someone's production line. A nice bolt-on to an existing project if someone gives you the free money, but nothing like enough funds for anything new.
It is because Musk thinks public transportation is for poor people. As long as rich people continue to believe themselves better than everyone else, the world will never get better.
@@jouaienttoi There a video not just bikes put out, with a neat quote in it: "A developed country is not a place where the poor people have cars, it's where the rich use public transportation." Yes, they're fast, better, more comfortable, but all the early high speed raid, the core networks, were capacity upgrades first and foremost - the corridor demand already there, it just made sense to improve things rather than build more of the same. Once HSR had proven itself and was in a position to compete with planes up to 600km or so, it could role out as a more convenient (and generally environmentally better) competitor. Not saying there aren't some white elephants, and lines that are more about politics than use, but the successful systems are built on a bedrock of existing public transport that people use. That's why the Tokaido Shinkansen - a capacity enhancement on what had been the busiest domestic Japanese transit corridor for a millenia - paid off its entire construction costs in a bit over 7 years. Hyperloop is badly thought out to the point that it's technically implausible with available tech. (Two people in a pod, doing less than 100mph, pushed hy a giant R/C car is not a technology demonstration. Or at least, not a convincing one). It's hideously uneconomic and aimed at catering to an exclusive market rather than a mass one. Failure was guaranteed.
The problem with wheeled outdoor trains is not their maximum speed. It's never been the main issue that you spend too much time sitting in the train while it's moving. All the problems with existing trains is that there isn't enough infrastructure to have sufficient numbers of train running, and have people get on and off the train near the places they want to travel between. It's a problem of price and availability. Making everything technologically much more complicated and expensive is not going to help with any of that.
That's just not true. If that was the case, highspeed trains wouldn't exist. Not only do people actively not want to spend time commuting, but urban efficiency can be linked to commute times - a shorter commute equals higher productivity.
@@matt-88 Yes, but my point is that the limited speed of high speed trains is not what's holding them back. Taking existing high speed train routes and station and only increasing travel speed while leaving everything else unchanged wouldn't really make a difference to transportation.
"Musk left his concept open source" - I would like to point out that I watched a documentary sometime in the late nineties or early naughties, where the concept of maglev trains in vacuum tubes was already explored. The only difference is, they did not call it fancy marketing names. Musk did not come up with any revolutionary idea, he simply read what others thought of before him and then forgot to mention this little detail. Also, the concept has merits but not in our age. It will definitely be a thing in the future but there are things to solve and some technological and socioeconomical progression to be had in order for it to be feasible.
@@ashraile honestly think this could happen but not for transport of humans but cargo. Why have a container spend 30-90 days at sea on a boat. Makes sense as there is a lot of value to companies.
Yeah the idea of trains in vacuum tubes - vactrains - has been around for around 200 years. Musk fans laud him for not patenting the idea, but he never could have because the ideas were already patented so long ago that the patents have expired. His white paper is typical Musk, all pie in the sky ideas that ignore the cruel reality of basic physics. Putting it underwater just makes it that much more expensive to build. Every 10 m deeper in the ocean the external pressure on the vacuum tube will increase by one atmosphere. Hyperloop is not going to happen because it is never going to be economical. The massive container ships sailing right now are capable of cruising at higher speeds but they don't because the added value of getting goods from A to B faster is less than the cost of the increased fuel usage.
@@walshmabob1834 did you hear the time between each hyperloop pod? Thats way too long to beat containerships that can carry up to 24 K containers wich will travel from east america to europe in about 11 days.
The concept of a vacuum train has been floating about for a hundred years or so but has always been found wanting practically. We were already very scientifically advanced over a hundred years ago, much of our fundamental knowledge was gained before then it's just that methods have been disseminated further and incrementally improved over many areas since.
7:37 that's really not a lot. You could build a regular cargo rail line and transport way more containers per day without needing to build massive vacuum tubes across entire countries.
Well hello there "name name name", does your work entail trolling CNN? do you know another channel "name name" or "missisipimissisipi"? Care to explain why there's a growing trend of repetitive names?
Hyperport is a blatant scam. 2800 containers a day? Or one average sized european freight train every 40 minutes or so. Even if you wanted that capacity each way, you could probably do it on a single track with passing loops.
It's one thing to stick some wings on a 50 metre long vacuum sealed tube and propel it through the sky. It's quite another thing to lay a vacuum sealed tube across the entire Atlantic ocean bed, dig a tunnel that can't leak air from LA to San Francisco or build essentially a giant pipeline that can't turn corners and can't leak for 1000s of miles. Then there's the problem of building intermediate stops, and how do you get the pods out and in while maintaining a vacuum? It's just got so many issues. We need to focus our efforts on making better rail networks instead.
And by running your capsules in a near-perfect vacuum, your capsules have to be built almost as strong as actual spacecraft. The Hyperloop is bringing all of the impracticalities of space travel on the cheap down to the surface of the Earth, without any of the benefits of space.
If the capsules are incapable of turning you can't have junctions or even exit ramp air locks. In order to get a capsule out you have to depressurize whole sections of the tube, or transfer them off the rail in vacuum after a full stop.
🤔 I forgot about maintaining the vacuum whilst simultaneously allowing passengers on and off, short distances would be tricky, but longer distances is a doddle, just segment it or you see how airplanes have boarding platforms? Have those at each station. The turns are quite ridiculous, just add curved tubes, whether the tube is straight, curved, loopy or zig-zag, this has no bearing on the vacuum seal. Idk how much or what materials the tubes will be made from, since I'm very sure building intercontinental hyperloops will take up a lot of material, even 5 tubes will travel 1000s of kms, from Canada's most northern city to Argentina's most southern, South Africa to Norway, Melbourne to Beijing, Tokyo to Dublin, then Dublin to Seattle. Which still leaves out the American East Coast, and the equator. Materials, logistics and costs are easily seen to, its politics that are tricky. For large countries, no problem, the hyperloop could spend hours in Russia, Canada, The USA, China, Australia, and India, but what about smaller countries that are just as, if not more, wealthy? It's a good idea, but I think the kinks in country policy need to be worked first.
@@nochill9475 When it comes to cost and politics, I have 4 words for you: California High Speed Rail. Look how expensive and difficult that has been and then tell me Hyperloops all over the world would be simple. It's just delusional.
Hardly surprising, literally half the comments of the video for the first concept were pointing out these flaws. Don't know why the B1M still defends these ideas and does not challenge the concept at all.
I took a step back at the end when he was basically defending the whole thing. Like, seriously? This has been ripped apart since the beginning. My guess is he's hoping for a seat on the next test track. Don't want to bite the hand giving out everlasting gobstoppers...
yeah, i thought the high amount of dislikes were from musk fans since B1M was questioning the idea for the most part of the video, but in the end he kinda defends it and i realised the dislikes were from people with common sense
I think the Hyperloop was when most people realized that Musk was, if not jumping the shark, at the very least approaching the ramp. The recent Twitter fiasco I think is what solidified it for all outside his cult that Muskie has no idea what the fuck he's doing and was never all that smart.
@@kirkc9643 If he could read anything beyond Elon's Twitter Feed he wouldn't be hyping the loop. It's not mob mentality, it's just reality. You sound like a Scientologist saying that if people stopped listening to all of the psychologists, academics, and other experts and just read Dianetics people would realize how much of a genius L. Ron Hubbard actually was.
@@electric7487 The Wright brothers weren’t even the first ones to get a man made object into the air. They we’re just the ones who did it practically, and this isn’t even close to being practical.
@@lonestarr1490 Precisely. How many millions have dreamt of perpetual motion machines that relied on the laws of motion and thermodynamics going out the window? Not all dreams come true.
If you do some math, 1) The thermal dilation of the tube cannot be compensated on 100s of km; 2) To hold a 90% vacuum you need a 10 KW vacuum pump every 10 (ten) meters. I have no idea why they didn't run the calculations before talking. The "Hyperloop" is an engineering impossibility...
It was a scam from the beginning. The math didn't matter because all that was necessary was a story good enough to steal investors' money. Elon needs to go to prison for fraud.
You'll also notice that all the press releases talk about the aspirational passenger experience, yet almost none of those people know how they're going to, for example, make moving-part vacuum seals that can compensate for a 12-inch length variation on a 6-metre diameter tube.
thermal dilation can compensate, for example, cern's LHC cooled -300 C, they have a strongest vaccume in solar system. We don't need a perfect vacume, even with 70% it can achieve fairly fast speed.
@@kirkc9643 Plenty of people criticize Scientology without having read any of L. Ron Hubbard's material either. Sometimes something is so blatantly and obviously wrong-headed and built on nonsense that the minutiae just don't matter. Funny enough with LRH having been a science fiction author back in the '20s and '30s he might've collaborated or been friends with the guy who actually came up with the hyperloop concept. Space Daddy didn't invent shit, he just repackaged old pipe dreams.
@@tjenadonn6158 I wouldn't comment about something I know nothing about. Much of what you think you know about Hyperloop is wrong and the facts do matter.
YEP! hyper loop what a shit deal high speed rail for public transit isn't so different so it takes a few hours from LA to SAN FARN 3 cars less then car? woop D do Basial 🤓
I remember watching a documentary on the TGV run and it was part of my childhood. Sometimes I'll go back and watch it because its such a legendary video. If I remember correctly, the speed was 574.8kmh. Edit: haha yes, just googled it, it was!
I could be wrong, but I think the difference between the invention of airplanes and the yet-to-be-invented hyperloops is that airplanes were invented by people who were the "development-first, marketing-second" kind of people, while the hyperloop people seem to be "we'll first market it, then we'll see if we can actually build it". I hope hyperloops become a reality, but so far they are just hype.
Exactly. Airplanes actually EXISTED. IN REALITY. And DID SOMETHING. IN REALITY. Hyperloop exists ONLY in drawings and CGI. And it's only ever existed in drawings and CGI. And it's likely to only ever exist in drawings and CGI because it's barely any less impractical to build now than when Goddard was first writing about it in the early 20th century.
I still think the hyper loop is just rich people thinking about some fancy overpriced version of something that already exists and works better than the hyper loop. The US for example just needs to invest in rail and Public transportation not adding extra fucking lanes to highways which does nothing good other than wasting space in city’s that could be used for better things.
100 years ago innovations only cost a few thousand dollars so a couple of brothers could invent something in their workshop, today if you want something new it costs tens of millions of dollars because everything that can be discovered for just a few thousand has already been discovered by someone else. That is why marketing is a must in today's world - no investors means no innovation. You have to get the investment before you can build your innovative new thing. Do you think the guys who founded Tesla had a few hundred million to spare? No, they made a sexy marketing video and it attracted Elon Musk to invest in their company.
No no noooo! Take a system that works and already has infrastructure all across the globe and make it better? Are you crazy? How can we have presentations with fancy futuristic names and CGI then and tweet about it for ego-boosting?
Not only that, but the high end of the market is all fraud. These "investors" are all either perpetrators or victims of fraud, depending on whether they know it's fraud. Like Madoff's victims, some will profit from the losses of other victims, but I still count them as victims for believing the lie.
Also as an artist who just loves the process of it can't art just exist, you know, for artistic purposes? When I'm in the darkroom working on my photographs I'm not making them thinking about the paycheck, I'm doing it because I love the process of working with film and I love photography as a medium.
Everyone already understands why this is a stupid idea that will never be built on any serious scale. The whole sales pitch is just "but look how fast it can go!" while speed is really not the issue with conventional modes of transportation. It is prohibitively expensive to build and has a laughably low throughput. You are basically combining all the drawbacks of trains with all the drawbacks of personal cars, while increasing construction costs by at least an order of magnitude. Even Elon Musk knows it's a stupid idea, which is why he did not pursue the idea himself, nor did anybody else, even though a pneumatic tube for moving people can be found in drawings of "the city of the future" as early as the 1920s. Even if you don't bother with the vacuum, this century-old idea is just not feasible on any serious scale.
Absolutely agree. It turns out achieving maximum speed at all cost is not an effective strategy for transportation. Hyperloop made so many sacrifices just to go fast that it's just completely impractical in every way imaginable. If you look at actual innovation, like the original Shinkansen from the 60s, which was also radical and massively expensive at the time, they didn't try to achieve high speed at any cost, the focus of the project was to move as many people as possible, which is why it was and still is so successful. The original Shinkansen 0 Series wasn't even that fast by modern HSR standards, 220km/h.
For real. The US is just allergic to building an actually good passenger train network. Like, we have trains going well past 300 kph/180mph in service all across the world. One of these trains is able to transport over a thousand people at a time comfortably and with extras like restaurants on board. But yes, let's increase cost to a ridiculous degree for something that has absolutely nothing going for it aside from some pipedream flashy speed number. Just. Build. Trains. Ffs
@@baumstammbruno and the whole sales pitch of Hyperloop being so much faster isn't even true. Sure, it goes 1200 km/h, but if you take into account acceleration/braking, stops, and the door-to-door travel part of the journey it doesn't even save that much time over a train going 350 km/h.
@@baumstammbruno It's because the airlines, automakers, and oil companies have too much political influence and are therefore preventing us from actually leading a sustainable future.
I like to think all the millionaires who threw heaps of money into these turned to their engineers like "I don't pay you to tell me how it can't be done, I pay you to figure it out!". Silicon Valley thinking at its best.
This has nothing to do with Silicon Valley. This whole fiasco happened in the desert and in SoCal somewhere. To be fair, we have a lot of annoying shysters mixed in with the productive creators and builders here in the Valley. But even our local resident shysters did not bite on the Hyperpoop scam! If that didn't clue people in that this whole thing was vaporware... it really is kinda' their own fault.
I find it so ironic it switched from passenger to freight. The reason Amtrak is always late and has other problems is because the majority of tracks in the US are owned by freight companies. Amtrak pays those railroads to run services on them, and because those tracks are freight owned, freight trains get dibs over Amtrak. While Amtrak owns the majority of the Northeast Corridor with an emphasis on fast passenger rail, and the differences are striking. NJ is another example where passenger rail dominates, as NJ Transit (owned by the NJ gov) owns the majority of tracks within the state, and thus passenger rail gets dibs over freight. This problem, which led to proposals like Hyperloop, is something money can't easily solve...but we CAN take the baby steps needed to get to that point. Rail helped connect the country, and it deserves to better serve the citizens
@@electric7487 This is what happens when you don't have any transportation industry professionals in your transportation company and just hire a bunch of yes men instead.
@@aimanrahman5768 Clearly you have never heard Big Big Train. Seriously though they're an English prog band that do a lot of material about civil engineering: I'm talking 24-minute epics about Isambard Kingdom Brunel, songs about the first industrial divers, shit like that. Their song East Coast Racer, which is about the train which set the landspeed record for steam-powered vehicles which still stands to this day, will absolutely make trains cool again to you.
Because why would you focus on pragmatic improvements to our existing infrastructure when you could hop on the hyperloop that will transport you to the space port, where you will ride the spin launch into the space future?
@@tjenadonn6158 I love when someone has unique knowledge to add to a conversation which seems like "What? Wow, I had no idea" to everyone else who thinks they know what they're talking about ;) But when I do it it's like "what why are you talking about the sproug of shtaffeuron in the comments of a video about a kid's toy that's creepy" but oh well, joke's on them
They finally realised it was a stupid idea for passengers so the switch to cargo now. In 2 years they will stop this idea for cargo too. Thig question they should answer: Does cargo NEEDS to move at high speed? 99% of supply chains are fine with a slow delivery - it just needs to be reliable. This is why we have big ships going 15mph around the globe. Speed is simply not an issue for cargo. The Hyperloop for cargo is not answering any need for our society. Use conventional trains - they work just fine for cargo and are incredibly efficient. But that does not bring much of the attention of the media. So let's put some cool names, cargo in tube, fancy CGI and.... free PR.
Swissmetro is a Swiss proposal from the 1970s that was essentially a hyperloop (by which I mean a maglev vacuum train). Our railway company evaluated the proposal and came to the conclusion that it would have a rather minimal impact on total travel time for most people and would come with an extremely high price tag. So not only is Hyperloop not new, we already knew it was a bad idea. Instead, Switzerland opted to implemented a highly coordinated national time table for public transport, with the goal to reduce wait times as much as possible. This had a very significant impact on total travel time and didn‘t cost nearly as much. Btw. It has a minimal impact on total travel time because usually you son‘t just want to go from city center to another city center, so you need to use local trains and buses on both ends. Plus trains have to accelerate and brake in a manner that isn‘t uncomfortable to people, so with these very high speed trains they actually take a significant part of the entire distance to accelerate and brake again, making their time-save not as high as you might think.
That’s because Switzerland is a small country it doesn’t even make sense to have a 700 mph speed vehicle moving you across a country 2/3rds the size of Oregon
Elon Musk: Look at this new system I came up with Everyone: Well that just sounds like a Maglev with extra steps Richard Branson, changing it to freight: *I totally didn't change my homework so it doesn't look like I copied...hehe*
Hyperloop even if it's possible won't even be feasible in the US as HSR is already slow to build and expand. If the HSR in US is already having a hard time being built and expanded, more so for hyperloop.
This is where Biden, time and oil prices come into play. If the president keeps increasing the price of petrol, then 20 years down the line its $35 a gallon, a $150 weekly pass won't seem to bad.
@@nochill9475 petrol is a rail Dodo. Both oil products and rail need fazing out to improve societies instead of pumping finance into centuries old infrastructure projects that harm both the environment and our biological networks. we must evolve not stem our progress. These companies do little but stem and refuse growth. Divest and allow our inclusion to evolve. If we can we (our species) might even be permitted to like ourselves again. STOP POISONING OUR AIR AND WORLD!
@@L.M1792 your ignorance is showing! 1. The hyperloop said it would use solar energy. 2. I didn't even give the slightest report of me siding with the oil corps. Yet you want to call me a dodo? 🙄 And if I dissed you I would be the bad guy.
Idc about hyper loop but I’m sick of bunk TH-camrs telling us everything is impossible In America while China and Europe add miles and miles of trains per year. Nyc can’t even connect LaGuardia to the subway ffs
8:34 well this sounds funny enough. Jet travel vs Hyperloop Jet travel - ~200 humans sit in a pressurized tube (to ~1 atm) and travel though the thin air of Earth's upper atmosphere at the speed of 500 mph Hyperloop - A few (?) humans sit in a pressurized tube (to ~1 atm), which in turn travels through another pressurized tube (to near vacuum) of the length of hundreds of miles, at the speed of 500 mph. Jet travel - plane travels above all the obstacles, its pretty mich independent from the infrastructure/terrain below. Hyperloop - tube cuts through all the terrain and infrastructure on the surface/(alternatively it's a continent-size underground metro, have fun with that), influencing everything on its path and in turn being influenced by anything along its hundreds of miles of length. Jet travel - people have no doubts about it, other than its sustainability in the face of climate catastrophe. Hyperloop - everyone either forgot about it or laughs at it. Yes, 𝘪𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘵, if it was the opposite day those two concepts would indeed be similar.
@@GeekyMedia Lol. Yeah, let's "observe" a scam, failing to point out that it's necessarily a scam, due to FUCKING LAWS OF PHYSICS AND LIMITATIONS OF ENGINEERING, and let the viewer "make up their mind".
@@MidnightSt As stated in the video, Engineering can improve massively over time. The first trains couldn't climb any hill. The first plane flew for just 12 minutes. The first cars went at 5mph.
@@SomeBritishGal1 Yes but there weren't any laws of physics saying trains couldn't climb hills, that planes couldn't fly longer than 12 *seconds* (not minutes), or that cars couldn't go faster than 5 mph. There are some very real laws of physics that a hyperloop bangs into.
The biggest problem for all of this is that it's an incredibly expensive & purely theoretical concept to "solve" issues that we already have solutions for. This type of money could be better used towards improving existing methods of transportation for both freight and people. Let's look towards upgrading freight ships to be more environmentally friendly, expanding train/subway/high speed rail routes both nation and statewide, separating both passenger and freight train tracks to optimize both, etc. All of these are proven and already existing technology that is in desperate need of some love!
Australia is looking to produce massive quantities of liquid hydrogen (from sunlight and water) and ship it around the world in hydrogen-powered ships. I think this is a better story.
@@endintiers Yep, dual-fuel Diesel engines using PFI like a petrol engine but then they inject a small amount of crude oil at the top to ignite it. Cuts down on CO2 emissions by 90% or more without needing a scrubber, even with high-sulfur crude.
CA HSR is not stalled, it's making steady progress on what was always planned as a years-long buildout. It's also an example of not being able or advisable to go in a straight line - there are mountains in the way, and the Central Valley route chosen instead includes several stops in fast-growing areas where an easier commute to LA or SF can bring some much-needed relief for housing costs there.
The problems CA HSR has have nothing to do with the technology. Building a hyperloop on the same route would have all the same problems plus the technological issues.
I can imagine hyperloop being the primary means of getting cargo in between cities such as Huston and Dallas/Fort Worth. However after thunderfoot's video I stopped believing it was likely that a passenger version would be possible. For now.
To be precise, Elon's only addition to the original idea was to have the pods run on air cushions inside the vacuum. An idea that was quickly abandoned in favour of maglev (and the video completely glosses over this change, showing Musk's drawings of air cushioned pods and then speaking about the maglev). Of course, like a laughable number of details about the Hyperloop, the air cushion idea was doomed from the start. Apart from the increased difficulty to maintain the vacuum, is unworkable because the air cushion is not strong enough to buffer vibrations and the pod would hit the wall.
@@Daneelro My god, you’re reminding me in detail how idiotic this whole hyperpoop crap was/is. Lord, I feel like my brain is leaking! How could anyone fall for this nonsense technobabble?! What is wrong with people? Even some of the technically-inclined educated ones fell for it! How? It’s as if Musk has a “forcefield of stupid” around him!
yea and than have literally just 1 "pod" break down in the middle of that giant tube and you will have the entire line completely blocked, up until they are somehow able to get to that said pod and somehow remove it alongside with fixing whatever damage a high-velocity chunk of metal could have caused while crashing into a wall at supersonic speeds. not to mention the possibility of sabotaging the entire system by just making a tiny hole in the side literally anywhere alongside that tube, or a malfunction of the entry mechanisms that would lead to a similar effect.
Well, given how many small pods there it would probably be a fully decentralised system so the pods would communicate to each other and reverse their course. And the steel is about one inch thick so it would be pretty hard to make an hole. Locating the hole for repair would be a nightmare but they can just add sound sensors along the tube because the hole is going to be pretty noisy.
@@johntheux9238 I don't think the alleged genius who had the bright idea to revolutionize subways by replacing them with cars thought that far. Elon is just a "say whatever bullshit it takes for them to throw money at me" type, not a "thinking" type.
@@tjenadonn6158 Musk does not own any hyperloop startup. He is not making a single cent out of this, quite the opposite, he is the one who provided the vacuum tube for the hyperloop competition for free.
It's never going to happen, that's what. 8:20 Well, then by that logic, a lot of people must have said when jetpacks first came out, "why do we need jetpacks when cars and trains work just fine?", right? And now everyone is travelling around by personal jetpack. ...Actually, no. That didn't happen. Because that would be extremely expensive and extremely dangerous. Even if the guy who originally proposed the idea was a "genius inventor who just wanted to make the world a batter place."
It could happen, but then that's just a realization of someone's dream that does not correlate with people's needs. Some science fiction that actually works including self opening door, smart homes, smartphone and computers. All of these succeed because they have value and purpose, they solve people's pain. So to make a good product is to understand entrepreneurship. Those engineers are just doing complex inefficient things for fun until they can find a better solutions.
@@kirkc9643 This is like saying "The reason you hate Mormonism is because you haven't read the Book of Mormon." Read something other than your cult literature. Space Daddy won't excommunicate you if you read stuff that contradicts your sacred writ, like a basic physics textbook or literally anything every written by people who work in the logistics industry.
The idea of train cars traveling through air-compressed tubea goes all the way back to the 1830s. Conventional steam locomotives were more practical and efficient, shocking, I know.
Freight does eliminates safety and rescue problems. Just need to deal with the legal obstacles of an inflexible, straight line route, the huge energy costs of maintaining a near vacuum, and good ingress/egress times to maintain transport capacity. Restricted to goods that can withstand vacuum and where transport time is critical. Sure sounds commercially viable to me.
The airplane comparison at the end sounds quite intriguing until one starts to think about it for 10 seconds... and realizes that the airplane is not travelling in vacuum, and it is not in an enclosed tube itself with no emergency exits where leakage on the fuselage and depressurization can be handled and the plane can offload its passengers anywhere it can land even on water... none of which is provided by the hyperturd... the issue with the vacuum train is also heat expansion that would either buckle the tube if vacuum hasn't already done that or would include seals that need to seal in vacuum while moving tubes in and out of one another... these joints would be very failure prone... and freight in pods are stupid... what made cheap goods possible... HUGE CARGO SHIPS with thousands of containers... not maintaining propulsion on a container by container basis... the train has 1 or 2 engines and dozens of train cars to lower cost... the vacuum train or hyperloop or whatever its name would become next is just as impractical today as it was a 100 years ago when it was first conceptualized... furthermore we can't even get a fucking tunnerl built sometimes for a road or train tracks... what makes anyone think that hundreds of miles of tunnel will be any easier? WTF!? People grow a brain.
and if you think just a little longer than 10 seconds you'll realise that at cruising altitude the air pressure is just over a fifth that of sea level and the temperature is minus 50 degrees Celsius. A sudden decompression can cause death in seconds. And as for 'landing on water' perhaps you should check the stats for the proportion of passengers that survive "landing" in the water on a passenger jet. Perhaps also then look at how many of those died from hypothermia or drowning. Try reading the Hyperloop whitepaper before making inaccurate statements based on flawed assumptions.
@@kirkc9643 The sky is free. Vaccuum tunnels are expensive. Sorry, but Space Daddy's Suck Tube isn't happening. Space Daddy himself has even moved onto the next grift.
@@kirkc9643 There are no assumptions here.. just high school levels of physics... There is a spectrum between catastrophic structural failure(that is super unlikely I might add) and an intact cabin. A pinhole and even bigger(like a full window blown out) on an airplane body has been survived by people. A pinhole will kill everyone in the capsule that travels in near perfect vacuum as the atmosphere leaves at the speed of sound in the tube whose volume is magnitudes bigger than that of the capsule... the airplane can move to lower altitude to mitigate, the capsule can't do anything... no evacuation options whatsoever before everyone is dead. At the airplane while there could be issues around evacuation, at least there is a non-0 chance you can make it. Oh and even technoponzi rocketjesus removed his laughable hyperloop whitepaper from his websites so I guess even he knows how stupid it really is. Everything the hyperloop promises can be done better and much cheaper as well as safer by a maglev train that unlike the hyperloop exists... and even conventional high speed rail can reach 300km/h on regular and tops out at 500... don't tell me it is not enough especially in a country where most trains travel at barely 60mph... come on...
My biggest issues with Musk grifts is how he siphons up public funds that could have been spent on actually existing and working infrastructure concepts that would invariably improve mobility in the areas they will ultimately never build a hyperturd
@@kozmaz87 Oh, and depressurization due to a hole is just the least likely of a ridiculously long list of unsolvable technical problems for the hyperloop. You would need a spaceship-style air system in the pods - which would be massive and take up quite some volume - to have breathable air for as long as people could get stuck inside during an emergency. But even with that, you can't do much for temperature regulation, it will just progressively heat up inside, cooking the passengers when they are stuck during an emergency. And stuck they would be, since _all_ pods would stop if there is an emergency at any point, with no means of evacuation. Forget pod leaks, what about vacuum tube leaks? Finding a leak from a pressurized vessel is difficult, finding one into a vacuum is like finding a needle in a haystack the size of Mount Everest. Forget leaks, what about regular maintenance? You have to stop all traffic, pressurize, do the work, then restore the vacuum, costing lots of time & energy. Then there is the slow but cumulative accumulation of iron dust from rust & even minor instances of friction (at stations). The sealing at stations. The laughably low passenger frequency that's possible. Thermal expansion. Earthquakes. Currents running through the long tubes. Switches (if nowhere else, you'd need them for the connection to the maintenance base). Reversing at terminal stations. I can't think of any other vaporware with _this many_ fatal issues...
I doubt many were sceptical of the jet plane because airplanes were already shown to be militarily and commercially viable. I doubt many were sceptical of early airplanes because the internal combustion engine was a new technology that would improve. No one thinks the problem with Hyperloop is the maglev or electric motor engines. It's the expansion joints, pumps and airlocks, which aren't new, rapidly improving technologies.
@@ashraile It is going to be a partial vacuum. A perfect vacuum is impossible. The idea is to make the tube 1/1000th that of standard atmosphere. Even that is insanely difficult and will consume massive amounts of energy.
we also know a lot more about physics, strengths of materials, and have computer modelling. Despite this knowledge and tech, we still have con artists telling us hyperloops on Earth 2022 are a good idea...
Also the jet airliner was being worked on by multiple companies, so even after early failures like the Di Havilland Comet (still one of the most beautiful aircraft ever flown in my opinion) there were other successful models like the Boeing 707 and the Douglas DC-8 to show that they were safe, reliable, and commercially viable. Other than the Musk outfit nobody's working on hyperloops, which aside from not demonstrating confidence in the technology on the part of engineering firms also means that if the Musk outfit goes tits up the entire concept goes tits up. Logistics companies aren't going to put all of their eggs onto one basket made by an extremely unreliable basket weaver, especially when it's the only basket of it's kind and they'll have to change their entire operation to make compatible eggs.
@@johntheux9238 In theory, yes. But in reality? No, not even close. Simply because, in the real world, _things leak_ and _things break_ all the time. It is almost absolutely guaranteed that any savings from not having to deal with air resistance would be completely outweighted by the energy required to pump down and maintain a 99.9% vacuum.
@@electric7487 Not really, 1 atmosphere is the same pressure as 10 meters of water so the energy requirement is the same as pumping the same volume of water up 10 meters. That's nothing.
@@johntheux9238 YOU WROTE: > "Not really, 1 atmosphere is the same pressure as 10 meters of water so the energy requirement is the same as pumping the same volume of water up 10 meters. That's nothing." I'm sorry, but how is *_any_* of this relevant to making the vacuum train a more viable or less unviable technology?
@@electric7487 One atmosphere is 100 kilonewtons per square meter. That's 100 KJ per cubic meter. One cubic meter of water is one ton, that's 10 kilonewtons per cubic meter so 100 KJ to pump one cubic meter up 10 meters. It's the same energy.
I dislike the ending of this video. People aren't skeptical of Hyperloop just because the tech/engineering required is insanely difficult, people are skeptical because it's a bad idea. And the fact that it's coming from Musk is just the cherry on top. This kind of project distracts from more practical, less expensive, and more readily available solutions to the public transportation issues that plague north america.
@@johntheux9238 None of his ideas have worked lmfao what are you tslking about. This task is a literal engineering impossibility and musk is a fraud pretending to be an intellectual. I mean did you fucking see his drawings for the concept of the hyperloop? Pod travelling through a vacuum yet somehow propped up by air cushions lmfao what a joke
The hyperloop is still not a smart idea and u can not compare it to a plane, its a totally different thing. And u don´t need a hyperloop with a complicated and expensive low vacuum in an expensive tube with small pods inside to get from los angeles to san franciso in 30 minutes. Bullettrains of today can reach 370mph and they just need smooth tracks.
no one wants to be transported in a windowless death trap. just bury the tube, put a rail in the tube, attach the pods to the rails, have it go through city centers get rid of the dumb vacuum, oh wait, just build a subway instead
I can see it now, improperly disclosed cargo in a shipping container (happens very often) gets shook around and blows up in the tube. Properly disclosed cargo would also get ruined since its not packaged for 0.4gs. Never get close to that on a ship
Imagine how much of a bitch it would be to transport livestock by hyperloop. Unless we start breeding cows and chickens to not need oxygen, food, and sanitation services while they're in transit that's going to be a problem.
Really? Strange that all the experts say that sea freight is typically subjected transverse forces of up to 0.8g...and for rail up to 4g (yes FOUR) longitudinally. But don't let facts get in the way of your claims.
@@kirkc9643 Muskrat going on a tweet rant after going Tony Montana on a mountain of dark web cocaine isn't an expert. Here's a tip: you can tell Muskie is talking our his as about something he which he hasn't the faintest clue about when his lips are moving.
@@kirkc9643 Yes and pulling a vacuum in a hyperloop tube is entirely feasible also, that's why there's a successful working prototype after all these many millions have been spent? this idea is bullshit from the start but its cute youre using facts to say this hyperloop is feasible even though theres a glaring problem like pulling a perfect vacuum in a space that big. Never going to happen but you can keep dick riding the idea and getting off to CGI of it since itll never happen
If you talk about such things, please make sure to adhere to ethical responsibilities and standards in the investment industry. Using a composite rather than a single picture and not only talking about return but also risk would be a starting point…
The great think about shipping cargo by tube means you get rid of 2/3's of the lorries & professionally trained drivers, so if the tube brakes down for any reason, the 'masses' are screwed! Emagine if I plane had a fault & couldn't take off & no other plane was allowed to take off until it was fixed. Also emagine 'IF' a simple SHIP got stuck in got stuck in a canal (impossible I know), what repercussions would that have???????
I like how you say "created by" for a cg trailer of something that hasn't been created. Also the closest anyone has come to a demonstration of this is 107 mph; my VW Golf goes faster than that. This was announced almost a decade ago & they still can't go faster than a hatchback...Also you didn't explain "what happened". Clearly this technology can't be made but you never explained why as implied by your clickbait title.
Propulsion is not the problem here. They cannot go faster because they would need a much longer test track for that, and they can't build that big a vacuum chamber (not to mention maintain it in working order against thermal expansion). That said, even at 107 mph, that Virgin Hyperloop pod had a rather bumpy ride, and vibrations increase in a non-linear fashion...
@@kirkc9643 So there will need to be a separate tube built to and from each destination, with no shared infrastructure between say the LA to NYC and the LA to DC routes, as can be done with standard and even high speed rail. Genius. How is this supposed to be better than trains again? And no, making money for The Lord Our Musk isn't a good enough reason.
In America we can't even figure out high speed rail. But we were supposed to pull off something vastly more difficult technically and vastly more expensive?
The problem with the hyperloop is that even if it might become real in the future, it will never be able to have enough capacity to make it a worthy form of transportation and it will probably be too expensive to fund for long trajectories.
Whatever Happened to Hyperloop? Well, maybe someone used their calculator and realized is was a stupid idea from the very beginning. It's not that you'd *need* a calculator to realize that, honestly, but maybe that's what it took
Unlike that one guy in here, and unlike any of the investors, they actually read the whitepaper and realized that it was less scientifically sound than Flat Earth theory.
I remember watching that video about how these companies and ideas are actually very stupid in practice. Specifically that one with individual cargo pods. Funny seeing them somewhere else
what freight needs to be transported so quickly that it goes by highspeed train? None. How frequently are flights really delayed by bad weather? Weather must surely have at most a marginal impact on air freight. The only real use case for such high speeds is for passengers, and if its not possible to use this for passengers then its not really useful at all
Also considering that most last-minute high-priority passengers who would avail themselves of high speed transit are business travellers, and given how especially since the pandemic business travel has all but completely been phased out in favor of videoconferencing (not even the fastest hyperloop can beat the instant provided by the internet) that leaves a perishingly small and shrinking demographic of people who would actually use this thing of it could be used for passengers. It certainly wouldn't be large enough to sustain the expense of building and running the service: similar low demand issues were a big part of what killed the Concorde, and Concorde didn't involve building giant vacuum tubes. The fact of the matter is that we never really need to transport physical goods or people for long distances any faster than we already can with conventional subsonic jet aircraft.
Sadly the term open source is being misused in many occasions including here. Hyperloop idea was not open sourced, but published without being patented. Being royalty free doesn't mean open source. The term is solely relevant when we are talking about software code written in compilable programming languages. You can't open source an idea, a song, a novel, or even a website written in HTML/CSS. Though you can make them royalty free by using licenses such as Creative Commons.
I suspect Hyperloop is/will facing similar issues to the Concord. Super fast transport sounds amazing in theory, but since existing transport is fast and affordable enough average person, that there just isn't a big push to make it happen. I lot of the tech we have today (esp like jets, vaccines, etc) had their development accelerated by an acute need... And while a successful Hyperloop system would be amazing, it's just not a strong enough acute need to get the development and fast tracking that other tech such as air transport had.
There's a reason why people say that necessity is the mother of invention. Inventions that aren't necessary don't go very far: that's why you don't see too many 3DTVs at Best Buy these days and why NFTs are crashing and burning.
This video did not comment on obvious defects in the design. Sabotage where the tube is blown up, breakdowns inside the tube how are you going to get anything out, competing with a maglev train that can basically do the same thing at a massively lower cost and can carry vastly more people and or cargo. If you're going to talk seriously about this you got to talk about the real stuff. Oh and let's not even talk about the power requirements.
There is not much power requirements, they would get most of their energy back with regenerative braking so they would only need a few solar panels on the roof to make up for the losses... And the tube is one inch thick so you would need a .50 cal to make a hole. Even if you did the chamber would just get slowly filled back with air.
it would be as if we replaced all stairs & escalators with high-speed elevators -- more shiny, more sophisticated, more expensive, but also partially less reliable, effective & resilient. we just have to ignore those electric cargo solutions called trains, which already have existing infrastructure. if we really want to, we can easily have single containers on wheeled individually-electrically driven ( or magnetic levitation ) automomous ai-controlled co2-neutral satellite-tracked ...... platforms ; there must be some real-world physics-conspiracy to make that a waste of rescources.
That's why Virgin Hyperloop is using battery powered pods, there is no infrastructure besides the tube and the rail. Everything else is integrated into the pod.
It's also inherently far more dangerous as well. A single breach and you're going to get a wall of air travelling at about 500 m/s down the tube in both directions. And it'll destroy almost anything it hits.
@@electric7487 Not really, each pod weight 15 tons for a cross section of 1.5 square meter so even with 1 atmosphere of pressure on one side that's only 1G
No matter how much I hate Thunderfoot's style, he did a great job explaining why hyper-loop is almost certain to never come to pass because the physics of the problem make the engineering practically impossible even with the best hypothetical materials. Something happens to damage the tube and you can watch videos of metal cans self crushing after having the air sucked out to understand what happens next.
Canada plan's on building one of these things in Calgary to Edmonton in Alberta, when I read an article about it I thought it was some joke or an interesting idea someone was just thinking about? Turns out, it's in the actual works and I think they've got the funding for it or need more but construction is set to begin in 2027
Wow so they already scaled it down, and inside the tube they run on tracks. Also, the main limiting factor is COST. Trains are already ridiculously expensive, and adding a fully enclosed tube around them that has to be perfectly sealed is hilarious. But thats the limiting factor, so lets remove it, but then theres air, so we should slow down to limit air resistance and oop- you developed a high speed train. Try again next time.
I am guessing regulations only apply when transporting people. When transporting cargo it will probably just be the limits of physics :) Let's see if they can launch 5+ pods every second!
@@ThomasBomb45 I'm not a fan of high speed rail whatsoever. The world is totally over rating the technology. A normal train that can hit 160kph is more than enough. Countries should focus more on widening the rail net.
Hardt Hyperloop built a pretty large testing facility, including a full loop of track, iirc, on a polder in the Netherlands somewhere a couple of years ago and are as far as i am aware still testing and with a number of buildt tracks. Hardt is also a start-up spinned off from the University of Delft, not a big corperation or billionare founded. Hardt has partnered with companies like BAM (the largest Dutch consteuction conglomerate) and TATA Steel. Im kinda disappointed that you barely touched on Hardt
Actually, Hardt's existing Hyperloop test track is only 30 m long, and their 2.9 km test centre is only in pre-production. They seem to be a bit less flashy than their competitors, but I'm still not holding my breath about then achieving anything of significance.
DisneyWorld has been using a “HyperLoop” for decades already and it’s a pretty large system. It’s still used to today even though it’s far more rudimentary, yet fairly low maintenance.
The most fascinating thing about the hyperloop is the CGI
😅 Before I realised they CGI everything, I really thought they were making headway, especially after I saw them test it on real people. About 8 years later and exposure to all kinds of CGI, you can get an app on your phone that makes it look like you have real tears, or you're really wherever you want in the world, I now know better.
Trust me they CGIed all of Australia. You're not an Ozzie are you?
Did you know the CGI was created with computers using vacuum tubes. /satire
😆 🤣
... which means that this is complete horse shit 🤣
Made me the think of NASA and the "Artist rendition" of the solar system.
They could solve a lot of these problems with some simple fixes. Capacity issues - make the pods longer, carrying more people. Distance needed between pods - link pods together and run several at a time. Can't take corners - run it a bit slower. Costs & technical difficulty of the vacuum - slower speeds mean it's not so important, make them aerodynamic. Costs of tunnelling or elevating - run them on the ground outside cities.
Wait... that's starting to look familiar.
But hyperloop is fancy! Why go with boring, old reliable trains that have been around for centuries!? Look at all the 3D rendering we can do to sell you vaporware!
I'm proud of this comment section.
Nailed it!
What about the safety? If it catches fire then that's a issue very difficult to solve in vaccum.
@@maazshahid8920 fire can't burn in a vacuum
Honestly, all those things mentioned in the video can be achieved with A) An electrified high speed rail and B) Electrified freight trains. But yeah, I kinda forgot that the US is afraid of anything related to trains.
Rail is expensive
It's cheaper in south Korea, Japan, Portugal, Sweden, Spain etc
@@chefandmusician9170 rail is cheaper in countries that invest in rail? Incredible.
@@CautiousKieran 😅🤣🤣
@@chefandmusician9170 not really. sure, usa is a large country, but most people live on coasts and that's where the network should begin. they aren't that large. especially in canada, most people live across a tiny strip near the border of usa, about the length of the UK but requires much less lines
Hello 🅱️oss
The Hyperport is just stupid. The biggest container ships today can move up to 24'000 containers (with a mix of 20 and 40 feet). This means the hyperloop has to run 24 hours a day for eight and a half days straight to replace ONE ship.
So let's say we transport goods across land. A typical European cargo train can carry about 60 containers. So to move 2'800 containers a day we need 47 trains. In the US trains run with even more containers, so you need even fewer trains, that run on existing infrastructure, with a system that is really stable and reliable in comparison. They are more energy efficient because they don't need vacuums and one locomotive hauls multiple cars and so on.
The port of Hamburg, Europe's third largest harbour moves about 28'000 containers a day. Let's say 17000 of them need to be moved by trains or road, the rest goes with planes and other ships. This means we need SIX hyperports to move them.
And all of that just so they can be fast, even if fast is pretty unimportant for many goods, reliability and cost-effectiveness on the other hand is very important.
I came to the comments for this. Thank you for posting
@@philipphaller7529 haha thank you and no problem xD
pretty sure boats take months. so the hyper loop taking a week sounds pretty good
@@lukabrown Reliability beats speed in freight transportation. Hyperloop needs vacuum to run that fast. If the infrastructure is damaged so that vacuum is no longer possible the whole line could stop. Repairing could take days or weeks.
@@Devillunar days or weeks still sounds better than months
Imagine if there was a better more feasible, pre-existing, and cost-effective (in comparison) transport technology that could become increasingly more innovated and has been shown to be highly effective. Oh, wait those are called trains. WE NEED MORE MONEY SPENT ON TRAINS lmao. I can see how Hyperloops in theory could be very beneficial. However, maybe we should figure out how to implement existing tech before we go spending millions on something that even the corporations coming up with this tech don't even know if they should continue.
Trains work very well -- in Europe, where they have pretty much always done passenger rail, and only do freight occasionally at night, usually on a separate track system from passenger. A big advantage they have over the US is that the track is owned by the state, and they lease the right to run trains over it.
In the US our track is owned by individual companies, which will be dammed before they let someone else run on their track. Also, most of the infrastructure was built in the 19th century, and about 2/3rds of that decayed out of existence over the first 60+ years of the 20th century as the ICC did their best to destroy the rail companies, and damned near succeeded in their mission.
The US rail companies are basically still in the 18th century as far as their mental concept of the world. For instance, it is accepted as a truism that you cannot schedule trains, because you never can tell when one will be ready to leave a yard, so you don't know when it will start occupying track. You also can't know how fast it will go, because that depends on the grades and the HP/ton ratio of the train, and the power planners generally aim for an average speed around 40MPH, IF the head-end equipment stays functional. In general it does not.
Almost every train set starts with at least one axle off-line for reasons the crew generally can't determine themselves. Typically at least one engine will break down completely on any given freight run, slowing the train down to about 10MPH, if not completely stopped until the company can either sent out additional power to finish dragging it to some place, or commonly send out a repair truck that will try to get a few axles back online long enough to get the train moving again. This usually takes hours, with the dead train occupying track.
This corporate mentality that all equipment should be only half-functional, and the idea that as a result you can't schedule trains, means that no existing track in the US could be used for scheduled passenger service. You will say that is exactly what Amtrak does. Yes, it has train schedules posted on the web site. It is a cold day in hell when one arrives on time at any station (outside the NE corridor, which is Amtrak's real purpose), and it is an even colder day that you can get from one place to another without delays.
Even if they ran on time, it is one train a week, leaving from some dark place in some inner city where only gang members still exist, leaving at 3 AM, scheduled to arrive in some other inner city derelict building just after all transport shuts down. And there isn't much chance of them building stations where people are, because none of the existing track followed the migration patterns after the early 20th century. Given that and environmentalists and the EPA, the chance of them being able to build track or a station is zero.
@@lwilton these issues can only be solved by public perception, not by building proprietary track that is even less accessible than traditional railroads
High speed trains are already solving the problems that Hyperloop purports to address. You don't need subersonic speeds, or even be faster than aeroplanes, to have hyper efficient, high throughput transportation of goods and passengers. In terms of passenger throughput (passengers/hour), trains will always be an order of magnitude better than individual "pods", regardless of how fast the pods are.
I will forever be baffled as to why the US refuses to invest in more rail infrastructure. I visit Japan every summer for family and the railway system there is incredible. You can live in a nice quiet suburb and be in the city in 5-10 minutes via train for less than 3$s.
@@Jonassoe You make some bold predictions. Trains make a lot of noise and only cover major cities well.
Yeah, freight. The thing that by and large needs to be transported so much faster than people. That's why freight trains and container ships are so popular. I'm sure creating an _incredibly_ expensive infrastructure will totally be worth it for the few items that need that speed.
Goods been in transport from China for 1 month, transported to next city in 12 hours instead of 24 hours, stored in stock for a month before it is sold
Exactly. Just unnecessary.
And now think about the routes. Building a steel tube from China to the US / US to Europe? I don't think so, because you would have to build across a huge ocean. China to Europe? Currently unthinkable because of politics.
Vertical farming is the investment that will save humanity. Attach vertical farms to shops and give communities all the fresh produce they could ever need throughout every shoppable minute of the year.
How did this comment get shaped into reality in a year that saw crippling supply chain issues worldwide?
@@rsybing Are you saying that hyperloop would fix these problems?
4:24 I‘d like to emphasize that a single high speed train can already carry more than 1000 passengers. Easily. So Hyperloop, even by the most generous assumptions, would need a total of nine hours to carry what a regular high speed railway accomplishes in one. Who thought this was a good idea again?
Most HSTs around the world carry less people then that. I believe the average is around 580. But if you linked two Chinese HSTs fill them up to it’s maximum capacity you could fit more then a thousand people easily
@@MrJimheeren My reference was a single Velaro CN (CRH3D) which has 1060 seats on 400 meters. But even the significantly slimmer TGV Duplex would carry at least 1020 passengers. Both measure just 400 meters. And France is going to operate 18 TGV per hour on the LGV Est. So they'll outclass Hyperloop by about ten times. On 40 year old infrastructure that's actually held back by being classic compatible.
The Germans conceptualized it and gave up on it cause it was not feasible. They did however associate it with lunar bases. They then went towards the Maglev direction which was subsequently shutdown by an accident, though I’m sure the accident was used as an excuse to prevent breakaway technologies from being discovered 20 years ago.
"Who thought this was a good idea again?"
The B1M/Tomorrow's Build team lol, they have been shilling it since the beginning and it doesn't look like they are going to stop any time soon.
@@MrJimheeren 'less people?' Why only small people? Surely you mean fewer and no less.
Imagine if all the hype, money, press coverage, engineers and materials hadn't been spent on a literal pipe dream, instead being put into building and maybe even improving existing high speed rail.
"dOn'T tElL tHeM wHaT tO dO!"
Unfortunately , geniuses have to work for stupid rich people.
Good in principle, but aside from all the big number hype, the actual money spent is about enough for a few tens of miles of track electrification and maybe a couple of extra train sets off someone's production line. A nice bolt-on to an existing project if someone gives you the free money, but nothing like enough funds for anything new.
It is because Musk thinks public transportation is for poor people. As long as rich people continue to believe themselves better than everyone else, the world will never get better.
@@jouaienttoi There a video not just bikes put out, with a neat quote in it: "A developed country is not a place where the poor people have cars, it's where the rich use public transportation."
Yes, they're fast, better, more comfortable, but all the early high speed raid, the core networks, were capacity upgrades first and foremost - the corridor demand already there, it just made sense to improve things rather than build more of the same. Once HSR had proven itself and was in a position to compete with planes up to 600km or so, it could role out as a more convenient (and generally environmentally better) competitor. Not saying there aren't some white elephants, and lines that are more about politics than use, but the successful systems are built on a bedrock of existing public transport that people use. That's why the Tokaido Shinkansen - a capacity enhancement on what had been the busiest domestic Japanese transit corridor for a millenia - paid off its entire construction costs in a bit over 7 years.
Hyperloop is badly thought out to the point that it's technically implausible with available tech. (Two people in a pod, doing less than 100mph, pushed hy a giant R/C car is not a technology demonstration. Or at least, not a convincing one). It's hideously uneconomic and aimed at catering to an exclusive market rather than a mass one. Failure was guaranteed.
The problem with wheeled outdoor trains is not their maximum speed. It's never been the main issue that you spend too much time sitting in the train while it's moving.
All the problems with existing trains is that there isn't enough infrastructure to have sufficient numbers of train running, and have people get on and off the train near the places they want to travel between. It's a problem of price and availability. Making everything technologically much more complicated and expensive is not going to help with any of that.
You spend even more time stuck in traffic
That's just not true. If that was the case, highspeed trains wouldn't exist. Not only do people actively not want to spend time commuting, but urban efficiency can be linked to commute times - a shorter commute equals higher productivity.
May I interest you in Shinkanshin
@@matt-88 Yes, but my point is that the limited speed of high speed trains is not what's holding them back.
Taking existing high speed train routes and station and only increasing travel speed while leaving everything else unchanged wouldn't really make a difference to transportation.
What about if you just do really well picked city pairs?
"Musk left his concept open source" - I would like to point out that I watched a documentary sometime in the late nineties or early naughties, where the concept of maglev trains in vacuum tubes was already explored. The only difference is, they did not call it fancy marketing names.
Musk did not come up with any revolutionary idea, he simply read what others thought of before him and then forgot to mention this little detail.
Also, the concept has merits but not in our age. It will definitely be a thing in the future but there are things to solve and some technological and socioeconomical progression to be had in order for it to be feasible.
I imagine an undersea hyperloop line linking the US and Europe in the year 3004.
@@ashraile honestly think this could happen but not for transport of humans but cargo. Why have a container spend 30-90 days at sea on a boat. Makes sense as there is a lot of value to companies.
Yeah the idea of trains in vacuum tubes - vactrains - has been around for around 200 years. Musk fans laud him for not patenting the idea, but he never could have because the ideas were already patented so long ago that the patents have expired. His white paper is typical Musk, all pie in the sky ideas that ignore the cruel reality of basic physics.
Putting it underwater just makes it that much more expensive to build. Every 10 m deeper in the ocean the external pressure on the vacuum tube will increase by one atmosphere. Hyperloop is not going to happen because it is never going to be economical. The massive container ships sailing right now are capable of cruising at higher speeds but they don't because the added value of getting goods from A to B faster is less than the cost of the increased fuel usage.
@@walshmabob1834 did you hear the time between each hyperloop pod? Thats way too long to beat containerships that can carry up to 24 K containers wich will travel from east america to europe in about 11 days.
The concept of a vacuum train has been floating about for a hundred years or so but has always been found wanting practically. We were already very scientifically advanced over a hundred years ago, much of our fundamental knowledge was gained before then it's just that methods have been disseminated further and incrementally improved over many areas since.
7:37 that's really not a lot. You could build a regular cargo rail line and transport way more containers per day without needing to build massive vacuum tubes across entire countries.
Well hello there "name name name", does your work entail trolling CNN? do you know another channel "name name" or "missisipimissisipi"?
Care to explain why there's a growing trend of repetitive names?
@Kly I'm sorry my name bothers you, but I've had this name since ~2015, so I'm not aware of any "growing trend of repetitive names".
@@kly8105 If his name is trolling CNN in the process, I see that as a double win.
@@kly8105 STFÜ 🤡
Hyperport is a blatant scam. 2800 containers a day? Or one average sized european freight train every 40 minutes or so. Even if you wanted that capacity each way, you could probably do it on a single track with passing loops.
I speak for all sane people:
*JUST.*
*BUILD.*
*A.*
*DAMN.*
*TRAIN.*
Did you say hyper pods on a hyper rail in a vacuum hypertube?
@@leonpaelinck no just a hyper long duper pod running on giga chad steel compound guidelines with mega low wear steel wheels
Did you say rocket delivery?
It's one thing to stick some wings on a 50 metre long vacuum sealed tube and propel it through the sky. It's quite another thing to lay a vacuum sealed tube across the entire Atlantic ocean bed, dig a tunnel that can't leak air from LA to San Francisco or build essentially a giant pipeline that can't turn corners and can't leak for 1000s of miles. Then there's the problem of building intermediate stops, and how do you get the pods out and in while maintaining a vacuum? It's just got so many issues. We need to focus our efforts on making better rail networks instead.
And by running your capsules in a near-perfect vacuum, your capsules have to be built almost as strong as actual spacecraft. The Hyperloop is bringing all of the impracticalities of space travel on the cheap down to the surface of the Earth, without any of the benefits of space.
If the capsules are incapable of turning you can't have junctions or even exit ramp air locks. In order to get a capsule out you have to depressurize whole sections of the tube, or transfer them off the rail in vacuum after a full stop.
Also what happens if there is a failure mid way thru a journey.
Now the entire system comes to a stop. And will take HOURS to fix.
🤔 I forgot about maintaining the vacuum whilst simultaneously allowing passengers on and off, short distances would be tricky, but longer distances is a doddle, just segment it or you see how airplanes have boarding platforms? Have those at each station.
The turns are quite ridiculous, just add curved tubes, whether the tube is straight, curved, loopy or zig-zag, this has no bearing on the vacuum seal.
Idk how much or what materials the tubes will be made from, since I'm very sure building intercontinental hyperloops will take up a lot of material, even 5 tubes will travel 1000s of kms, from Canada's most northern city to Argentina's most southern, South Africa to Norway, Melbourne to Beijing, Tokyo to Dublin, then Dublin to Seattle. Which still leaves out the American East Coast, and the equator.
Materials, logistics and costs are easily seen to, its politics that are tricky.
For large countries, no problem, the hyperloop could spend hours in Russia, Canada, The USA, China, Australia, and India, but what about smaller countries that are just as, if not more, wealthy?
It's a good idea, but I think the kinks in country policy need to be worked first.
@@nochill9475 When it comes to cost and politics, I have 4 words for you: California High Speed Rail. Look how expensive and difficult that has been and then tell me Hyperloops all over the world would be simple. It's just delusional.
Hardly surprising, literally half the comments of the video for the first concept were pointing out these flaws. Don't know why the B1M still defends these ideas and does not challenge the concept at all.
I took a step back at the end when he was basically defending the whole thing. Like, seriously? This has been ripped apart since the beginning.
My guess is he's hoping for a seat on the next test track. Don't want to bite the hand giving out everlasting gobstoppers...
yeah, i thought the high amount of dislikes were from musk fans since B1M was questioning the idea for the most part of the video, but in the end he kinda defends it and i realised the dislikes were from people with common sense
I think the Hyperloop was when most people realized that Musk was, if not jumping the shark, at the very least approaching the ramp. The recent Twitter fiasco I think is what solidified it for all outside his cult that Muskie has no idea what the fuck he's doing and was never all that smart.
Unlike so many who repeat the same flawed statements over and over, perhaps he actually read the Hyperloop whitepaper.
@@kirkc9643 If he could read anything beyond Elon's Twitter Feed he wouldn't be hyping the loop. It's not mob mentality, it's just reality. You sound like a Scientologist saying that if people stopped listening to all of the psychologists, academics, and other experts and just read Dianetics people would realize how much of a genius L. Ron Hubbard actually was.
"Dreamers must never be underestimated"
Yes, but only if they are dreaming for a cause, not just publicity.
Also, out of 100 dreamers maybe 1 ever comes up with something that actually works.
@@lonestarr1490 Exactly. They laughed at the Wright Brothers, but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
@@lonestarr1490 I think you're being wildly optimistic.
Maybe 1:10.000
@@electric7487 The Wright brothers weren’t even the first ones to get a man made object into the air. They we’re just the ones who did it practically, and this isn’t even close to being practical.
@@lonestarr1490 Precisely. How many millions have dreamt of perpetual motion machines that relied on the laws of motion and thermodynamics going out the window? Not all dreams come true.
If you do some math,
1) The thermal dilation of the tube cannot be compensated on 100s of km;
2) To hold a 90% vacuum you need a 10 KW vacuum pump every 10 (ten) meters.
I have no idea why they didn't run the calculations before talking.
The "Hyperloop" is an engineering impossibility...
It was a scam from the beginning. The math didn't matter because all that was necessary was a story good enough to steal investors' money. Elon needs to go to prison for fraud.
You'll also notice that all the press releases talk about the aspirational passenger experience, yet almost none of those people know how they're going to, for example, make moving-part vacuum seals that can compensate for a 12-inch length variation on a 6-metre diameter tube.
Because Musk is a pure grifter whose wealth depends on his ability to generate hype. Nothing more, nothing less.
you just gave the solution to your own problems.
thermal dilation can compensate, for example, cern's LHC cooled -300 C, they have a strongest vaccume in solar system. We don't need a perfect vacume, even with 70% it can achieve fairly fast speed.
How kind of Elon to open source Robert Goddard's idea. Very, very generous sort of fellow.
Elon's a genius at the art of plagiarism.
Hyperloop ended up exactly where (imo) most people with common sense assumed it would end up.
No where.
☮
And how many of those people actually read Elon Musk's Hyperloop whitepaper? Based on their flawed statements I'd say few if any.
@@kirkc9643 Plenty of people criticize Scientology without having read any of L. Ron Hubbard's material either. Sometimes something is so blatantly and obviously wrong-headed and built on nonsense that the minutiae just don't matter.
Funny enough with LRH having been a science fiction author back in the '20s and '30s he might've collaborated or been friends with the guy who actually came up with the hyperloop concept. Space Daddy didn't invent shit, he just repackaged old pipe dreams.
@@tjenadonn6158 I wouldn't comment about something I know nothing about. Much of what you think you know about Hyperloop is wrong and the facts do matter.
@@kirkc9643 *_"The White Paper!! The White Paper!! All praise to the White Paper!!"_*
@@kirkc9643 There is plenty of people who work with vacuum systems daily commenting.
Virgin Hyperloop only managed to move 2 people at 107mph...? The French TGV POS trains set a record for over 350mph, in 2007~, on rails.
YEP! hyper loop what a shit deal high speed rail for public transit isn't so different so it takes a few hours from LA to SAN FARN 3 cars less then car? woop D do Basial 🤓
I remember watching a documentary on the TGV run and it was part of my childhood. Sometimes I'll go back and watch it because its such a legendary video.
If I remember correctly, the speed was 574.8kmh.
Edit: haha yes, just googled it, it was!
@@sabersz I think I saw the same documentary. It blew me away and I cannot believe we haven't built high speed rail here in Canada.
Virgin hyperloop track was only 500m long........
It obviously cannot go pass 1200 per hour...
I could be wrong, but I think the difference between the invention of airplanes and the yet-to-be-invented hyperloops is that airplanes were invented by people who were the "development-first, marketing-second" kind of people, while the hyperloop people seem to be "we'll first market it, then we'll see if we can actually build it". I hope hyperloops become a reality, but so far they are just hype.
Exactly. Airplanes actually EXISTED. IN REALITY. And DID SOMETHING. IN REALITY.
Hyperloop exists ONLY in drawings and CGI. And it's only ever existed in drawings and CGI. And it's likely to only ever exist in drawings and CGI because it's barely any less impractical to build now than when Goddard was first writing about it in the early 20th century.
I still think the hyper loop is just rich people thinking about some fancy overpriced version of something that already exists and works better than the hyper loop. The US for example just needs to invest in rail and Public transportation not adding extra fucking lanes to highways which does nothing good other than wasting space in city’s that could be used for better things.
100 years ago innovations only cost a few thousand dollars so a couple of brothers could invent something in their workshop, today if you want something new it costs tens of millions of dollars because everything that can be discovered for just a few thousand has already been discovered by someone else. That is why marketing is a must in today's world - no investors means no innovation. You have to get the investment before you can build your innovative new thing.
Do you think the guys who founded Tesla had a few hundred million to spare? No, they made a sexy marketing video and it attracted Elon Musk to invest in their company.
@@krashd Tesla already existed and running before Elon came
In my opinion they should just rebuild and keep improving the infrastructure of modern day trains
Based
No that's socialism lol
No no noooo! Take a system that works and already has infrastructure all across the globe and make it better? Are you crazy? How can we have presentations with fancy futuristic names and CGI then and tweet about it for ego-boosting?
@@joji_okami Don't forget seeing those stock prices go up!
It doesn’t hurt to research new things but this should not be a priority compared to reality and existing infrastructure.
Being a son of artists, I must say, the whole idea of investing in art sickens me. Pure speculative market with no money going to artists.
Not only that, but the high end of the market is all fraud. These "investors" are all either perpetrators or victims of fraud, depending on whether they know it's fraud. Like Madoff's victims, some will profit from the losses of other victims, but I still count them as victims for believing the lie.
I hate that seemingly credible channels promote this crap.
It's all a giant scam to help millionaires to evade taxes and launder money.
Yeah it isn't investing. You want to invest, go buy some shares in an index fund. It will pay you dividends and you control when you sell.
Also as an artist who just loves the process of it can't art just exist, you know, for artistic purposes? When I'm in the darkroom working on my photographs I'm not making them thinking about the paycheck, I'm doing it because I love the process of working with film and I love photography as a medium.
Simply put. Don't be an artist, be a designer and engineer. Or a dictator.
Everyone already understands why this is a stupid idea that will never be built on any serious scale. The whole sales pitch is just "but look how fast it can go!" while speed is really not the issue with conventional modes of transportation. It is prohibitively expensive to build and has a laughably low throughput. You are basically combining all the drawbacks of trains with all the drawbacks of personal cars, while increasing construction costs by at least an order of magnitude.
Even Elon Musk knows it's a stupid idea, which is why he did not pursue the idea himself, nor did anybody else, even though a pneumatic tube for moving people can be found in drawings of "the city of the future" as early as the 1920s. Even if you don't bother with the vacuum, this century-old idea is just not feasible on any serious scale.
Absolutely agree. It turns out achieving maximum speed at all cost is not an effective strategy for transportation. Hyperloop made so many sacrifices just to go fast that it's just completely impractical in every way imaginable.
If you look at actual innovation, like the original Shinkansen from the 60s, which was also radical and massively expensive at the time, they didn't try to achieve high speed at any cost, the focus of the project was to move as many people as possible, which is why it was and still is so successful. The original Shinkansen 0 Series wasn't even that fast by modern HSR standards, 220km/h.
Agree about the sales pitch lol
For real. The US is just allergic to building an actually good passenger train network. Like, we have trains going well past 300 kph/180mph in service all across the world. One of these trains is able to transport over a thousand people at a time comfortably and with extras like restaurants on board. But yes, let's increase cost to a ridiculous degree for something that has absolutely nothing going for it aside from some pipedream flashy speed number. Just. Build. Trains. Ffs
@@baumstammbruno and the whole sales pitch of Hyperloop being so much faster isn't even true. Sure, it goes 1200 km/h, but if you take into account acceleration/braking, stops, and the door-to-door travel part of the journey it doesn't even save that much time over a train going 350 km/h.
@@baumstammbruno It's because the airlines, automakers, and oil companies have too much political influence and are therefore preventing us from actually leading a sustainable future.
I like to think all the millionaires who threw heaps of money into these turned to their engineers like "I don't pay you to tell me how it can't be done, I pay you to figure it out!".
Silicon Valley thinking at its best.
Haha, the engineers are the millionaires in that scenario.
The investors are hedge funds and billionaires.
Feels more like they expensed it as R&D to lower their tax obligations for that year.
@@popcorny007 Theyre self declared engineers, that way they sound legitimate
This has nothing to do with Silicon Valley. This whole fiasco happened in the desert and in SoCal somewhere.
To be fair, we have a lot of annoying shysters mixed in with the productive creators and builders here in the Valley. But even our local resident shysters did not bite on the Hyperpoop scam! If that didn't clue people in that this whole thing was vaporware... it really is kinda' their own fault.
@@blankblankity451 graduated from School of Reddit
I find it so ironic it switched from passenger to freight. The reason Amtrak is always late and has other problems is because the majority of tracks in the US are owned by freight companies. Amtrak pays those railroads to run services on them, and because those tracks are freight owned, freight trains get dibs over Amtrak. While Amtrak owns the majority of the Northeast Corridor with an emphasis on fast passenger rail, and the differences are striking. NJ is another example where passenger rail dominates, as NJ Transit (owned by the NJ gov) owns the majority of tracks within the state, and thus passenger rail gets dibs over freight.
This problem, which led to proposals like Hyperloop, is something money can't easily solve...but we CAN take the baby steps needed to get to that point. Rail helped connect the country, and it deserves to better serve the citizens
Exactly. They are now focusing on precisely one of the areas where speed is one of the lowest priorities.
@@electric7487 This is what happens when you don't have any transportation industry professionals in your transportation company and just hire a bunch of yes men instead.
Well, it's kind of odd how he keeps ignoring the experts telling him to consider trains instead
Trains doesn't sound cool
@@aimanrahman5768 Clearly you have never heard Big Big Train. Seriously though they're an English prog band that do a lot of material about civil engineering: I'm talking 24-minute epics about Isambard Kingdom Brunel, songs about the first industrial divers, shit like that. Their song East Coast Racer, which is about the train which set the landspeed record for steam-powered vehicles which still stands to this day, will absolutely make trains cool again to you.
Because why would you focus on pragmatic improvements to our existing infrastructure when you could hop on the hyperloop that will transport you to the space port, where you will ride the spin launch into the space future?
@@tjenadonn6158 I love when someone has unique knowledge to add to a conversation which seems like "What? Wow, I had no idea" to everyone else who thinks they know what they're talking about ;)
But when I do it it's like "what why are you talking about the sproug of shtaffeuron in the comments of a video about a kid's toy that's creepy" but oh well, joke's on them
@@ResistantStillness Wow, he really doesn't like humanity that much huh
Elon Musk open sourcing the Hyperloop white paper is like the "ideas guy" in game development who wants everyone else to do the work.
It’s all theory crap which isn’t even possible. But all hail the white paper lol.
i would also add that he does not need to "opensource" hyperloop, it's an idea, a simple concept, and as such it cannot be his property.
Not even his idea idea made by a British guy over a century ago
They finally realised it was a stupid idea for passengers so the switch to cargo now. In 2 years they will stop this idea for cargo too.
Thig question they should answer:
Does cargo NEEDS to move at high speed?
99% of supply chains are fine with a slow delivery - it just needs to be reliable. This is why we have big ships going 15mph around the globe. Speed is simply not an issue for cargo.
The Hyperloop for cargo is not answering any need for our society.
Use conventional trains - they work just fine for cargo and are incredibly efficient.
But that does not bring much of the attention of the media. So let's put some cool names, cargo in tube, fancy CGI and.... free PR.
As of late, the big cargo ships decreased their average speed even further in order to save fuel. That's how unimportant speed is for cargo.
@@lonestarr1490 Excellent point, more people should be mentioning that.
Ikr. Cargo, really? Even a fat ass cargo ship is companies' most favorable transportation for cargo.
For fast delivery we have cargo plane for that.
Swissmetro is a Swiss proposal from the 1970s that was essentially a hyperloop (by which I mean a maglev vacuum train).
Our railway company evaluated the proposal and came to the conclusion that it would have a rather minimal impact on total travel time for most people and would come with an extremely high price tag.
So not only is Hyperloop not new, we already knew it was a bad idea.
Instead, Switzerland opted to implemented a highly coordinated national time table for public transport, with the goal to reduce wait times as much as possible. This had a very significant impact on total travel time and didn‘t cost nearly as much.
Btw. It has a minimal impact on total travel time because usually you son‘t just want to go from city center to another city center, so you need to use local trains and buses on both ends. Plus trains have to accelerate and brake in a manner that isn‘t uncomfortable to people, so with these very high speed trains they actually take a significant part of the entire distance to accelerate and brake again, making their time-save not as high as you might think.
That’s because Switzerland is a small country it doesn’t even make sense to have a 700 mph speed vehicle moving you across a country 2/3rds the size of Oregon
It’s different when we’re talking about a country like the United States or Canada where cities are sometimes separated for days apart.
Elon Musk: Look at this new system I came up with
Everyone: Well that just sounds like a Maglev with extra steps
Richard Branson, changing it to freight: *I totally didn't change my homework so it doesn't look like I copied...hehe*
Hyperloop even if it's possible won't even be feasible in the US as HSR is already slow to build and expand. If the HSR in US is already having a hard time being built and expanded, more so for hyperloop.
I always thought transport investment, especially recent investment, came from external sources.
This is where Biden, time and oil prices come into play.
If the president keeps increasing the price of petrol, then 20 years down the line its $35 a gallon, a $150 weekly pass won't seem to bad.
@@nochill9475 petrol is a rail Dodo. Both oil products and rail need fazing out to improve societies instead of pumping finance into centuries old infrastructure projects that harm both the environment and our biological networks. we must evolve not stem our progress. These companies do little but stem and refuse growth. Divest and allow our inclusion to evolve. If we can we (our species) might even be permitted to like ourselves again.
STOP POISONING OUR AIR AND WORLD!
@@L.M1792 your ignorance is showing!
1. The hyperloop said it would use solar energy.
2. I didn't even give the slightest report of me siding with the oil corps.
Yet you want to call me a dodo? 🙄
And if I dissed you I would be the bad guy.
Idc about hyper loop but I’m sick of bunk TH-camrs telling us everything is impossible In America while China and Europe add miles and miles of trains per year. Nyc can’t even connect LaGuardia to the subway ffs
Well, you guys elect people like Biden so...
Look at who is running NYC
It’s political problems.
@@contro they haven’t ran NYC for decades though….
Well said. All these imaginary projects are just stupid excuses not to build more trains.
8:34 well this sounds funny enough.
Jet travel vs Hyperloop
Jet travel - ~200 humans sit in a pressurized tube (to ~1 atm) and travel though the thin air of Earth's upper atmosphere at the speed of 500 mph
Hyperloop - A few (?) humans sit in a pressurized tube (to ~1 atm), which in turn travels through another pressurized tube (to near vacuum) of the length of hundreds of miles, at the speed of 500 mph.
Jet travel - plane travels above all the obstacles, its pretty mich independent from the infrastructure/terrain below.
Hyperloop - tube cuts through all the terrain and infrastructure on the surface/(alternatively it's a continent-size underground metro, have fun with that), influencing everything on its path and in turn being influenced by anything along its hundreds of miles of length.
Jet travel - people have no doubts about it, other than its sustainability in the face of climate catastrophe.
Hyperloop - everyone either forgot about it or laughs at it.
Yes, 𝘪𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘵, if it was the opposite day those two concepts would indeed be similar.
Seriously, the Musk brain mush in the video is real.
The only fascinating thing about Hyperloop is how quickly and completely channels like this and others fell for the fraud.
No one “fell” for it. The B1M & Hyperloop observe - the viewer makes their own mind up
@@GeekyMedia Lol.
Yeah, let's "observe" a scam, failing to point out that it's necessarily a scam, due to FUCKING LAWS OF PHYSICS AND LIMITATIONS OF ENGINEERING, and let the viewer "make up their mind".
@@MidnightSt As stated in the video, Engineering can improve massively over time. The first trains couldn't climb any hill. The first plane flew for just 12 minutes. The first cars went at 5mph.
@@SomeBritishGal1 Yes but there weren't any laws of physics saying trains couldn't climb hills, that planes couldn't fly longer than 12 *seconds* (not minutes), or that cars couldn't go faster than 5 mph. There are some very real laws of physics that a hyperloop bangs into.
@@GeekyMedia How was the Cool Aid? You seem to have had swallowed it all.
Hyperloop was never going to be anything I don't know why people thought it would. It's an old idea and never worked.
That vacuum tube space launch idea made more sense than this "holding your left ear by your left foot index finger" idea.
Lmao whatever happened to high speed rail in Cali and Texas? Stop relying on Elon, bruh dipped on twitter fast
I don't know about Texas, but California high speed rail is currently under construction.
The biggest problem for all of this is that it's an incredibly expensive & purely theoretical concept to "solve" issues that we already have solutions for. This type of money could be better used towards improving existing methods of transportation for both freight and people. Let's look towards upgrading freight ships to be more environmentally friendly, expanding train/subway/high speed rail routes both nation and statewide, separating both passenger and freight train tracks to optimize both, etc. All of these are proven and already existing technology that is in desperate need of some love!
Ikr. It's like building another search engine when there's Google Search lol.
Australia is looking to produce massive quantities of liquid hydrogen (from sunlight and water) and ship it around the world in hydrogen-powered ships. I think this is a better story.
@@endintiers Yep, dual-fuel Diesel engines using PFI like a petrol engine but then they inject a small amount of crude oil at the top to ignite it. Cuts down on CO2 emissions by 90% or more without needing a scrubber, even with high-sulfur crude.
CA HSR is not stalled, it's making steady progress on what was always planned as a years-long buildout. It's also an example of not being able or advisable to go in a straight line - there are mountains in the way, and the Central Valley route chosen instead includes several stops in fast-growing areas where an easier commute to LA or SF can bring some much-needed relief for housing costs there.
Video also makes similarly false claims that HS2 in the UK has had delay after delay when the target opening is still within the original window.
It's a lemon. Admit it.
The problems CA HSR has have nothing to do with the technology. Building a hyperloop on the same route would have all the same problems plus the technological issues.
I can imagine hyperloop being the primary means of getting cargo in between cities such as Huston and Dallas/Fort Worth. However after thunderfoot's video I stopped believing it was likely that a passenger version would be possible. For now.
It's not Elons vision, this idea existed long before he was even born.
He polished the crap out of this turd though! His "just add gamer lights" marketing strategy has worked magic on this vaporware!
They didn't have CGI to make it look cool
@@j1nchuika Personally I prefer the look of those old Popular Mechanics illustrations. They have character.
To be precise, Elon's only addition to the original idea was to have the pods run on air cushions inside the vacuum. An idea that was quickly abandoned in favour of maglev (and the video completely glosses over this change, showing Musk's drawings of air cushioned pods and then speaking about the maglev).
Of course, like a laughable number of details about the Hyperloop, the air cushion idea was doomed from the start. Apart from the increased difficulty to maintain the vacuum, is unworkable because the air cushion is not strong enough to buffer vibrations and the pod would hit the wall.
@@Daneelro My god, you’re reminding me in detail how idiotic this whole hyperpoop crap was/is. Lord, I feel like my brain is leaking!
How could anyone fall for this nonsense technobabble?! What is wrong with people? Even some of the technically-inclined educated ones fell for it! How?
It’s as if Musk has a “forcefield of stupid” around him!
yea and than have literally just 1 "pod" break down in the middle of that giant tube and you will have the entire line completely blocked, up until they are somehow able to get to that said pod and somehow remove it alongside with fixing whatever damage a high-velocity chunk of metal could have caused while crashing into a wall at supersonic speeds. not to mention the possibility of sabotaging the entire system by just making a tiny hole in the side literally anywhere alongside that tube, or a malfunction of the entry mechanisms that would lead to a similar effect.
my favourite thing about the hyperloop is musks inital idea. a pod propelled by a propeller in a VACUUM.
Well, given how many small pods there it would probably be a fully decentralised system so the pods would communicate to each other and reverse their course.
And the steel is about one inch thick so it would be pretty hard to make an hole. Locating the hole for repair would be a nightmare but they can just add sound sensors along the tube because the hole is going to be pretty noisy.
@@LunarPenguin42 It's a compressor to produce an air bearing, the pod itself is propelled by a linear motor, not a propeller.
@@johntheux9238 I don't think the alleged genius who had the bright idea to revolutionize subways by replacing them with cars thought that far. Elon is just a "say whatever bullshit it takes for them to throw money at me" type, not a "thinking" type.
@@tjenadonn6158 Musk does not own any hyperloop startup. He is not making a single cent out of this, quite the opposite, he is the one who provided the vacuum tube for the hyperloop competition for free.
It's never going to happen, that's what.
8:20 Well, then by that logic, a lot of people must have said when jetpacks first came out, "why do we need jetpacks when cars and trains work just fine?", right? And now everyone is travelling around by personal jetpack.
...Actually, no. That didn't happen. Because that would be extremely expensive and extremely dangerous. Even if the guy who originally proposed the idea was a "genius inventor who just wanted to make the world a batter place."
It's called science FICTION for a reason.
It could happen, but then that's just a realization of someone's dream that does not correlate with people's needs. Some science fiction that actually works including self opening door, smart homes, smartphone and computers. All of these succeed because they have value and purpose, they solve people's pain. So to make a good product is to understand entrepreneurship. Those engineers are just doing complex inefficient things for fun until they can find a better solutions.
Same for flying cars. Technically possible but extremely dangerous. Not worth all trouble it will bring.
Dude musk just ripped of older ideas . He just gave some high level design which even a middle school kid could draw and give.
I love how everyone in the comment section immediately realises what a bad idea this is
I wonder why those who made the video can't.
@@angryhairpeice The Church of Muskratology brainwashes people something fierce.
yet none of them bothered to even look at the Hyperloop whitepaper.
@@angryhairpeice because they read the Hyperloop whitepaper instead of just repeating flawed claims from the internet.
@@kirkc9643 This is like saying "The reason you hate Mormonism is because you haven't read the Book of Mormon." Read something other than your cult literature. Space Daddy won't excommunicate you if you read stuff that contradicts your sacred writ, like a basic physics textbook or literally anything every written by people who work in the logistics industry.
Marketing team: “how can we reboot interest and promised timelines for hyper loop without solving any of our challenges?” - “let’s switch to cargo!”
The idea of train cars traveling through air-compressed tubea goes all the way back to the 1830s. Conventional steam locomotives were more practical and efficient, shocking, I know.
At least vacuum trains smelled like bacon.
We actually en full circle
@@mrsniffles5417 Memes don't make for technological breakthroughs.
Freight does eliminates safety and rescue problems. Just need to deal with the legal obstacles of an inflexible, straight line route, the huge energy costs of maintaining a near vacuum, and good ingress/egress times to maintain transport capacity. Restricted to goods that can withstand vacuum and where transport time is critical. Sure sounds commercially viable to me.
If you have to troubleshoot this much maybe the thing you really need to shoot is the person who proposed the idea in the first place.
Not to mention that maintenance would be basically impossible.
Congratulations,
You made a worse train.
- Hyperloop, probably
The airplane comparison at the end sounds quite intriguing until one starts to think about it for 10 seconds... and realizes that the airplane is not travelling in vacuum, and it is not in an enclosed tube itself with no emergency exits where leakage on the fuselage and depressurization can be handled and the plane can offload its passengers anywhere it can land even on water... none of which is provided by the hyperturd... the issue with the vacuum train is also heat expansion that would either buckle the tube if vacuum hasn't already done that or would include seals that need to seal in vacuum while moving tubes in and out of one another... these joints would be very failure prone... and freight in pods are stupid... what made cheap goods possible... HUGE CARGO SHIPS with thousands of containers... not maintaining propulsion on a container by container basis... the train has 1 or 2 engines and dozens of train cars to lower cost... the vacuum train or hyperloop or whatever its name would become next is just as impractical today as it was a 100 years ago when it was first conceptualized... furthermore we can't even get a fucking tunnerl built sometimes for a road or train tracks... what makes anyone think that hundreds of miles of tunnel will be any easier? WTF!? People grow a brain.
and if you think just a little longer than 10 seconds you'll realise that at cruising altitude the air pressure is just over a fifth that of sea level and the temperature is minus 50 degrees Celsius. A sudden decompression can cause death in seconds. And as for 'landing on water' perhaps you should check the stats for the proportion of passengers that survive "landing" in the water on a passenger jet. Perhaps also then look at how many of those died from hypothermia or drowning. Try reading the Hyperloop whitepaper before making inaccurate statements based on flawed assumptions.
@@kirkc9643 The sky is free. Vaccuum tunnels are expensive. Sorry, but Space Daddy's Suck Tube isn't happening. Space Daddy himself has even moved onto the next grift.
@@kirkc9643 There are no assumptions here.. just high school levels of physics...
There is a spectrum between catastrophic structural failure(that is super unlikely I might add) and an intact cabin. A pinhole and even bigger(like a full window blown out) on an airplane body has been survived by people. A pinhole will kill everyone in the capsule that travels in near perfect vacuum as the atmosphere leaves at the speed of sound in the tube whose volume is magnitudes bigger than that of the capsule... the airplane can move to lower altitude to mitigate, the capsule can't do anything... no evacuation options whatsoever before everyone is dead. At the airplane while there could be issues around evacuation, at least there is a non-0 chance you can make it.
Oh and even technoponzi rocketjesus removed his laughable hyperloop whitepaper from his websites so I guess even he knows how stupid it really is.
Everything the hyperloop promises can be done better and much cheaper as well as safer by a maglev train that unlike the hyperloop exists... and even conventional high speed rail can reach 300km/h on regular and tops out at 500... don't tell me it is not enough especially in a country where most trains travel at barely 60mph... come on...
My biggest issues with Musk grifts is how he siphons up public funds that could have been spent on actually existing and working infrastructure concepts that would invariably improve mobility in the areas they will ultimately never build a hyperturd
@@kozmaz87 Oh, and depressurization due to a hole is just the least likely of a ridiculously long list of unsolvable technical problems for the hyperloop.
You would need a spaceship-style air system in the pods - which would be massive and take up quite some volume - to have breathable air for as long as people could get stuck inside during an emergency. But even with that, you can't do much for temperature regulation, it will just progressively heat up inside, cooking the passengers when they are stuck during an emergency. And stuck they would be, since _all_ pods would stop if there is an emergency at any point, with no means of evacuation.
Forget pod leaks, what about vacuum tube leaks? Finding a leak from a pressurized vessel is difficult, finding one into a vacuum is like finding a needle in a haystack the size of Mount Everest.
Forget leaks, what about regular maintenance? You have to stop all traffic, pressurize, do the work, then restore the vacuum, costing lots of time & energy.
Then there is the slow but cumulative accumulation of iron dust from rust & even minor instances of friction (at stations). The sealing at stations. The laughably low passenger frequency that's possible. Thermal expansion. Earthquakes. Currents running through the long tubes. Switches (if nowhere else, you'd need them for the connection to the maintenance base). Reversing at terminal stations.
I can't think of any other vaporware with _this many_ fatal issues...
I doubt many were sceptical of the jet plane because airplanes were already shown to be militarily and commercially viable. I doubt many were sceptical of early airplanes because the internal combustion engine was a new technology that would improve. No one thinks the problem with Hyperloop is the maglev or electric motor engines. It's the expansion joints, pumps and airlocks, which aren't new, rapidly improving technologies.
I still don't understand why they don't make it a partial vacuum instead of a total vacuum.
@@ashraile It is going to be a partial vacuum. A perfect vacuum is impossible. The idea is to make the tube 1/1000th that of standard atmosphere. Even that is insanely difficult and will consume massive amounts of energy.
@@JonMartinYXD And the problems you get are only 0.1% less severe than if it was a perfect vacuum.
we also know a lot more about physics, strengths of materials, and have computer modelling. Despite this knowledge and tech, we still have con artists telling us hyperloops on Earth 2022 are a good idea...
Also the jet airliner was being worked on by multiple companies, so even after early failures like the Di Havilland Comet (still one of the most beautiful aircraft ever flown in my opinion) there were other successful models like the Boeing 707 and the Douglas DC-8 to show that they were safe, reliable, and commercially viable. Other than the Musk outfit nobody's working on hyperloops, which aside from not demonstrating confidence in the technology on the part of engineering firms also means that if the Musk outfit goes tits up the entire concept goes tits up. Logistics companies aren't going to put all of their eggs onto one basket made by an extremely unreliable basket weaver, especially when it's the only basket of it's kind and they'll have to change their entire operation to make compatible eggs.
1:45 "the two main factors slowing down conventional vehicles: friction and air ressistance"
Yeah... right
I'm proud of the common sense on display in this comment section. Way to go, guys
I mean having more common sense than Elon and the Church of Muskratology is a low bar to clear if ever there was one.
@@tjenadonn6158 pretty much
All of the infrastructure needs of a train without any of the efficiencies. Brilliant.
Running in a vacuum is way more efficient.
@@johntheux9238 In theory, yes. But in reality? No, not even close. Simply because, in the real world, _things leak_ and _things break_ all the time. It is almost absolutely guaranteed that any savings from not having to deal with air resistance would be completely outweighted by the energy required to pump down and maintain a 99.9% vacuum.
@@electric7487 Not really, 1 atmosphere is the same pressure as 10 meters of water so the energy requirement is the same as pumping the same volume of water up 10 meters. That's nothing.
@@johntheux9238
YOU WROTE:
> "Not really, 1 atmosphere is the same pressure as 10 meters of water so the energy requirement is the same as pumping the same volume of water up 10 meters. That's nothing."
I'm sorry, but how is *_any_* of this relevant to making the vacuum train a more viable or less unviable technology?
@@electric7487 One atmosphere is 100 kilonewtons per square meter. That's 100 KJ per cubic meter.
One cubic meter of water is one ton, that's 10 kilonewtons per cubic meter so 100 KJ to pump one cubic meter up 10 meters.
It's the same energy.
"Or just a pipe dream"
I don't know if the pun was intended, but it surely got a laugh out of me.
Even on a video that tries to be somewhat critical on hyperloop you still manage to be a corporate mouthpiece. Well done.
your actuly a corporate mouthpiece
I dislike the ending of this video. People aren't skeptical of Hyperloop just because the tech/engineering required is insanely difficult, people are skeptical because it's a bad idea. And the fact that it's coming from Musk is just the cherry on top. This kind of project distracts from more practical, less expensive, and more readily available solutions to the public transportation issues that plague north america.
These people will literally do anything BUT build more train infrastructure
Musk ideas worked pretty well so far... Why not this one?
Besides, it's an extremely good idea. Have you been in an airport before? It's a nightmare.
@@johntheux9238 None of his ideas have worked lmfao what are you tslking about. This task is a literal engineering impossibility and musk is a fraud pretending to be an intellectual. I mean did you fucking see his drawings for the concept of the hyperloop? Pod travelling through a vacuum yet somehow propped up by air cushions lmfao what a joke
@@johntheux9238 The Hyperloop isn't Musk's idea, nor is it a good one.
@@electric7487 And why is it a bad one?
8:50 lies everyone looks up when a plane/helicopter flies overhead
The hyperloop is still not a smart idea and u can not compare it to a plane, its a totally different thing.
And u don´t need a hyperloop with a complicated and expensive low vacuum in an expensive tube with small pods inside to get from los angeles to san franciso in 30 minutes.
Bullettrains of today can reach 370mph and they just need smooth tracks.
no one wants to be transported in a windowless death trap. just bury the tube, put a rail in the tube, attach the pods to the rails, have it go through city centers get rid of the dumb vacuum, oh wait, just build a subway instead
Nice conclusion there. "Dreamers should never be underestimated". There is a difference between a dreamer and a charlatan though.
Hyperloop was always only an attempt to stop high-speed intercity rail and preserve the auto industry's stranglehold.
So overall, it is still best to make a train, and even better if it can fit on the standard gauge that is where it is
I can see it now, improperly disclosed cargo in a shipping container (happens very often) gets shook around and blows up in the tube. Properly disclosed cargo would also get ruined since its not packaged for 0.4gs. Never get close to that on a ship
Or breaks out of the tube at 1000 km/h. 40' shipping container missile inbound!
Imagine how much of a bitch it would be to transport livestock by hyperloop. Unless we start breeding cows and chickens to not need oxygen, food, and sanitation services while they're in transit that's going to be a problem.
Really? Strange that all the experts say that sea freight is typically subjected transverse forces of up to 0.8g...and for rail up to 4g (yes FOUR) longitudinally. But don't let facts get in the way of your claims.
@@kirkc9643 Muskrat going on a tweet rant after going Tony Montana on a mountain of dark web cocaine isn't an expert. Here's a tip: you can tell Muskie is talking our his as about something he which he hasn't the faintest clue about when his lips are moving.
@@kirkc9643 Yes and pulling a vacuum in a hyperloop tube is entirely feasible also, that's why there's a successful working prototype after all these many millions have been spent? this idea is bullshit from the start but its cute youre using facts to say this hyperloop is feasible even though theres a glaring problem like pulling a perfect vacuum in a space that big. Never going to happen but you can keep dick riding the idea and getting off to CGI of it since itll never happen
Comparing a single picture against the S&P 500 - nice job :D
If you talk about such things, please make sure to adhere to ethical responsibilities and standards in the investment industry. Using a composite rather than a single picture and not only talking about return but also risk would be a starting point…
Hyperloop makes me think of Logan's Run. It's a great idea to make movies look more futuristic. "Logan's Run Mazecar Scene"
I am shocked that the thing everyone said wasn't feasible turned out to be unfeasible.
The great think about shipping cargo by tube means you get rid of 2/3's of the lorries & professionally trained drivers, so if the tube brakes down for any reason, the 'masses' are screwed! Emagine if I plane had a fault & couldn't take off & no other plane was allowed to take off until it was fixed. Also emagine 'IF' a simple SHIP got stuck in got stuck in a canal (impossible I know), what repercussions would that have???????
Anything Richard Branson touches costs more money than planned and almost always fails
He's the real life version of Montgomery burns.
What really happened was interest rates went up and no more cheap free money to build something new and different
I like how you say "created by" for a cg trailer of something that hasn't been created. Also the closest anyone has come to a demonstration of this is 107 mph; my VW Golf goes faster than that. This was announced almost a decade ago & they still can't go faster than a hatchback...Also you didn't explain "what happened". Clearly this technology can't be made but you never explained why as implied by your clickbait title.
I've seen modified golf carts that hit 150 on the quarter mile.
Propulsion is not the problem here. They cannot go faster because they would need a much longer test track for that, and they can't build that big a vacuum chamber (not to mention maintain it in working order against thermal expansion). That said, even at 107 mph, that Virgin Hyperloop pod had a rather bumpy ride, and vibrations increase in a non-linear fashion...
One of the simplest thing that I have never been figured out is how the Hyperloop switch tracks or in this case, tubes.
Musk never figured that out either, that's why he moved onto the next shiney thing that captured his goldfish-esque attention.
If you read the Hyperloop whitepaper you'd know that it does not.
@@kirkc9643 So there will need to be a separate tube built to and from each destination, with no shared infrastructure between say the LA to NYC and the LA to DC routes, as can be done with standard and even high speed rail. Genius. How is this supposed to be better than trains again? And no, making money for The Lord Our Musk isn't a good enough reason.
@@kirkc9643 "All glory to the White Paper"
In America we can't even figure out high speed rail. But we were supposed to pull off something vastly more difficult technically and vastly more expensive?
Wow! The Hyperloop travels as fast as heaven! It's gonna be the new shortest "road trip" ever taken!
The problem with the hyperloop is that even if it might become real in the future, it will never be able to have enough capacity to make it a worthy form of transportation and it will probably be too expensive to fund for long trajectories.
It's 2022 and we're still talking about this hyperflop.
To be fair the boring company only started working on this a few months ago so we will have to wait to see if it's a flop or not.
Whatever Happened to Hyperloop? Well, maybe someone used their calculator and realized is was a stupid idea from the very beginning. It's not that you'd *need* a calculator to realize that, honestly, but maybe that's what it took
Unlike that one guy in here, and unlike any of the investors, they actually read the whitepaper and realized that it was less scientifically sound than Flat Earth theory.
I remember watching that video about how these companies and ideas are actually very stupid in practice. Specifically that one with individual cargo pods. Funny seeing them somewhere else
what freight needs to be transported so quickly that it goes by highspeed train? None. How frequently are flights really delayed by bad weather? Weather must surely have at most a marginal impact on air freight. The only real use case for such high speeds is for passengers, and if its not possible to use this for passengers then its not really useful at all
Also considering that most last-minute high-priority passengers who would avail themselves of high speed transit are business travellers, and given how especially since the pandemic business travel has all but completely been phased out in favor of videoconferencing (not even the fastest hyperloop can beat the instant provided by the internet) that leaves a perishingly small and shrinking demographic of people who would actually use this thing of it could be used for passengers. It certainly wouldn't be large enough to sustain the expense of building and running the service: similar low demand issues were a big part of what killed the Concorde, and Concorde didn't involve building giant vacuum tubes. The fact of the matter is that we never really need to transport physical goods or people for long distances any faster than we already can with conventional subsonic jet aircraft.
Sadly the term open source is being misused in many occasions including here. Hyperloop idea was not open sourced, but published without being patented. Being royalty free doesn't mean open source. The term is solely relevant when we are talking about software code written in compilable programming languages. You can't open source an idea, a song, a novel, or even a website written in HTML/CSS. Though you can make them royalty free by using licenses such as Creative Commons.
dont go there
The word you are looking for is "royalty"...
@@Baerchenization my bad. Thanks for correction.
I suspect Hyperloop is/will facing similar issues to the Concord. Super fast transport sounds amazing in theory, but since existing transport is fast and affordable enough average person, that there just isn't a big push to make it happen. I lot of the tech we have today (esp like jets, vaccines, etc) had their development accelerated by an acute need... And while a successful Hyperloop system would be amazing, it's just not a strong enough acute need to get the development and fast tracking that other tech such as air transport had.
There's a reason why people say that necessity is the mother of invention. Inventions that aren't necessary don't go very far: that's why you don't see too many 3DTVs at Best Buy these days and why NFTs are crashing and burning.
This video did not comment on obvious defects in the design. Sabotage where the tube is blown up, breakdowns inside the tube how are you going to get anything out, competing with a maglev train that can basically do the same thing at a massively lower cost and can carry vastly more people and or cargo. If you're going to talk seriously about this you got to talk about the real stuff. Oh and let's not even talk about the power requirements.
There is not much power requirements, they would get most of their energy back with regenerative braking so they would only need a few solar panels on the roof to make up for the losses...
And the tube is one inch thick so you would need a .50 cal to make a hole. Even if you did the chamber would just get slowly filled back with air.
it would be as if we replaced all stairs & escalators with high-speed elevators -- more shiny, more sophisticated, more expensive, but also partially less reliable, effective & resilient.
we just have to ignore those electric cargo solutions called trains, which already have existing infrastructure.
if we really want to, we can easily have single containers on wheeled individually-electrically driven ( or magnetic levitation ) automomous ai-controlled co2-neutral satellite-tracked ...... platforms ; there must be some real-world physics-conspiracy to make that a waste of rescources.
There’s a nice Vid by Adam Something about why the Hyperport is a bad idea
Who needs really fast freight? Perishable fruit? Who wants food squished to pulp when subject to 6 G's ?
What slows down conventional vehicles: that vehicle standing just before you
Dreamers should never be underestimated, yet you also shouldn't follow a dream that's becoming a nightmare.
Be open minded, but not so open that your brains fall out. Scrap hyperloop, build trains.
@@StephanTrube Well said.
The upfront cost would out weigh anything. We'll never see an hyperloop.
That's why Virgin Hyperloop is using battery powered pods, there is no infrastructure besides the tube and the rail. Everything else is integrated into the pod.
It's also inherently far more dangerous as well. A single breach and you're going to get a wall of air travelling at about 500 m/s down the tube in both directions. And it'll destroy almost anything it hits.
@@electric7487 Not really, each pod weight 15 tons for a cross section of 1.5 square meter so even with 1 atmosphere of pressure on one side that's only 1G
@@johntheux9238 1.5 m²?! *_Have you ANY idea how TINY that is for a form of transport?_*
sole reason Hyperloop was suggested was to make it less likely that CA would build a train.
And then the guy who suggested it ditched California. Can't wait to see what sort of con he pulls on Texas.
No matter how much I hate Thunderfoot's style, he did a great job explaining why hyper-loop is almost certain to never come to pass because the physics of the problem make the engineering practically impossible even with the best hypothetical materials. Something happens to damage the tube and you can watch videos of metal cans self crushing after having the air sucked out to understand what happens next.
Canada plan's on building one of these things in Calgary to Edmonton in Alberta, when I read an article about it I thought it was some joke or an interesting idea someone was just thinking about? Turns out, it's in the actual works and I think they've got the funding for it or need more but construction is set to begin in 2027
Nah, the hyperloop does seem pretty ridiculous. idk how much cargo ports move in a day but it seems like way more than the hyperwhatever could
Wow so they already scaled it down, and inside the tube they run on tracks. Also, the main limiting factor is COST. Trains are already ridiculously expensive, and adding a fully enclosed tube around them that has to be perfectly sealed is hilarious. But thats the limiting factor, so lets remove it, but then theres air, so we should slow down to limit air resistance and oop- you developed a high speed train. Try again next time.
I haven't watched yet, but how is this video 9 minutes long when it only takes 3 seconds to say "in the trash where it belongs"?
Made this entire video to use the "pipe dream" pun he's been sitting on 😂
So its 1 hyperloop pod every 80 seconds. How exactly does that work for cargo when it wasn't enough capacity for people?
I am guessing regulations only apply when transporting people. When transporting cargo it will probably just be the limits of physics :)
Let's see if they can launch 5+ pods every second!
$4B annual to Israel. $40B to Ukraine. 76B annually for world wide military basis. Stop telling us the money isn’t there
4b for Egypt, 1.5b for iraq . Plus numerous social programs around the world that I as a Moroccan can't understand
@@leoaksil4085 I can’t understand why we finance you sandies either
@@leoaksil4085 Tbh iraq one seems a bit more convincing given that we are the one who destroyed it...in the first place
Still, money would be better spent building high speed rail and even low speed rail
@@ThomasBomb45 I'm not a fan of high speed rail whatsoever. The world is totally over rating the technology. A normal train that can hit 160kph is more than enough. Countries should focus more on widening the rail net.
Ah yes 2000 containers a day… if it was 2,000 an hour? It might be worthwhile. But when a ship hauls 14,000-20,000 containers. Hard pass.
Hardt Hyperloop built a pretty large testing facility, including a full loop of track, iirc, on a polder in the Netherlands somewhere a couple of years ago and are as far as i am aware still testing and with a number of buildt tracks.
Hardt is also a start-up spinned off from the University of Delft, not a big corperation or billionare founded. Hardt has partnered with companies like BAM (the largest Dutch consteuction conglomerate) and TATA Steel.
Im kinda disappointed that you barely touched on Hardt
This isn't a logistics channel, this is an Elon Musk evangelism channel.
@@tjenadonn6158 yeah i am disappointed they didn't mention Hardt, but I'm Hardtly suprised 🙄🙄
Actually, Hardt's existing Hyperloop test track is only 30 m long, and their 2.9 km test centre is only in pre-production. They seem to be a bit less flashy than their competitors, but I'm still not holding my breath about then achieving anything of significance.
@@Daneelro thank you for the corrections
DisneyWorld has been using a “HyperLoop” for decades already and it’s a pretty large system. It’s still used to today even though it’s far more rudimentary, yet fairly low maintenance.
Just one Adam Something video could’ve prevented this one.