• gun
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    The top speed recorded is 288 mph and hasn’t been beaten in 3 years. This isn’t even faster than the fastest train at 374 mph which doesn’t need vacuum tubes. Considering that hyperloop is just a fast train in a vacuum to make it go even faster, you’d expect it to at least beat trains after 10 years of work. So you tell me.

    • X51
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 years ago

      I think it’s supposed to be more efficient, not just fast. I worked with a guy who helped design Maglev trains for China. With my limited knowledge, I’d think that a train floating above a track with no friction and being propelled by a magnetic wave has more potential that a train in a tube. I’m not familiar with the power and technology it takes to create that magnetic wave, but I still think it has more potential. I should have asked how the wave was created, but I was too amazed that the technology even existed.

      • gun
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 years ago

        Idk, I think any argument that hyperloop is more energy efficient goes out the window when you consider the energy costs of having to keep depressurized a 500 mile long tube.

        • X51
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 years ago

          I agree, and if it’s underground, accessibility has to be considered over and above pressurization. It’s more suitable for freight transport than it is moving people. It has to be earthquake-proof in some regions. Logistically, I don’t think it’s a good idea. It’s fun in concept because it makes us think we’re stepping into the future, but there are better visions for our future than a pressurized tube.