Elon Musk wants to take his train to Chicago.
The billionaire tech entrepreneur tweeted Wednesday that his Boring Company would compete to design, fund, build and operate a high-speed loop connecting O'Hare Airport with downtown Chicago.
Musk's statement came after Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel asked for proposals to build and operate a high-speed rail line that will whisk passengers from the airport to downtown in 20 minutes or fewer, cutting travel times in half. Contractors will also have to figure out how to finance it without taxpayer dollars, Emanuel said.
The L already connects O'Hare and Midway airports to downtown Chicago.
Related Stories
Elon Musk wants to sell you a flamethrower for $500 — and it seems to be legal in California
Elon Musk, the mastermind behind PayPal, Tesla and SpaceX, has another innovative product up in his sleeve: a $500 flamethrower. Musk announced the flamethrower on Saturday, after weeks of teasing a possible flamethrowing product for his newest venture, The Boring Company. The Boring Company's mission is to excavate a low-cost but fast-digging tunnel through Los Angeles to help alleviate its notorious car traffic.
Musk's announcements on Instagram and Twitter about the flamethrower has all been in tongue-in-cheek tone, but his legions of followers have lapped up the chance to buy a flamethrower from The Boring Company. Over 2,000 people have pre-ordered the device so far, according to Musk on Twitter.
Pre-orders are expected to ship in the spring, according to The Boring Company's website. "When the zombie apocalypse happens, you'll be glad you bought a flamethrower," tweeted Musk. "Works against hordes of the undead or your money back!"
The California Health and Safety Codes 12750 to 12761 outline that owning or selling flamethrowers is illegal without a permit granted from the state fire marshal, joining Maryland as the only two states in the country to have flamethrower regulations. The state has defined flamethrowers as "any nonstationary and transportable device designed or intended to emit or propel a burning stream of combustible or flammable liquid a distance of at least 10 feet." But since The Boring Company's flamethrower emits fire less than the defined 10 feet, they did not have to get a permit to sell, according to the company's spokesman.
At time of this story being posted, the pre-order count had climbed to 10k.
Update: One California lawmaker wants to ban the flamethrower. But it's puny compared to other flamethrowers.
Also at CNN, MarketWatch, and CNET.
Related: Elon Musk Claims to Have "Verbal Approval" to Build New York to Washington, D.C. Hyperloop
NY-Philly-Baltimore-DC Hyperloop: Not Vaporware?
Elon Musk's Boring Tunnel Near Los Angeles
Elon Musk to Compete for High-Speed Rail Loop in Chicago
Elon Musk's Boring Co. Wins Chicago Airport High-Speed Train Bid
Elon Musk's Boring Co. is the winner in a bid to build a multibillion-dollar high-speed express train to O'Hare International Airport, according to people with knowledge of the matter. The result gives the young company a big boost in legitimacy as it tries to get transportation projects underway in Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.
The company beat out a consortium that included Mott MacDonald, the civil engineering firm that designed a terminal at London's Heathrow Airport, and JLC Infrastructure, an infrastructure fund backed by former basketball star Earvin "Magic" Johnson, said the people, who declined to be identified because they weren't authorized to speak publicly. The city is expected to announce the news as soon as Thursday, one person said.
It's a sizeable victory for a company that was launched just 18 months ago, is working with unproven futuristic ideas, and—aside from a test tunnel it is digging in the Los Angeles suburb Hawthorne, California—lacks construction experience.
Also at Chicago Tribune, CNBC, and The Verge.
Previously: Elon Musk to Compete for High-Speed Rail Loop in Chicago
Related: Elon Musk Claims to Have "Verbal Approval" to Build New York to Washington, D.C. Hyperloop
Washington, D.C. Granted Elon Musk's Boring Company an Excavation Permit for Possible Hyperloop
Elon Musk pitches $1, 150 MPH "Loop" Rides under Los Angeles
(Score: 5, Informative) by frojack on Friday December 01 2017, @10:10PM (4 children)
No public funding, means ticket prices too high for Joe User. The city will never be able to drop the horrid L service,
Transit to a single destination seldom pays for itself which is why all transit solutions end up being publicly funded to some degree.
The taxpayer supported price he will be competing against is $5 or $2.50 [transitchicago.com] depending on which airport you want to go to. They both have lots of stops, which is why it takes 45 minutes. The only way you reduce that time is drop most intermediate stops.
Chicago's L is mostly a spoke system [transitchicago.com], with just a few easy transfers from one line to another other than down town. And the downtown hub is utter chaos 24/7.
You could make the case that the common citizen would be better served by connecting all FAR ends of the various lines to a diagonal that ran to OHare from Dan Ryan and Lynden. It would remove a lot of crunch from downtown. But that would hardly help big money people in downtown.
Digging in a city (especially an old city) can be full of surprises. One vertical well casing unseen on anyone's maps stopped Seattle's Bertha in its tracks [seattletimes.com] for over a year. Even though that pipe was installed in 2002 by DOT itself. Chicago is bound to have that kind of thing in spades.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 01 2017, @11:38PM
Chicago may have a more interesting issue. It is a platform city much like Seattle. Where large chunks of the city are raised up to be above the water level of lake Michigan. Flooding is not unheard of there and a fairly regular occurrence.
To beat the blue line they will have to lower the cost dramatically or at the very least be equal. Or provide some sort of premium on those extra 20 mins you get.
The few times I took the blue line to downtown or the other way around it was fairly empty at the airport terminal. At least the trains would leave and not be even close to full that is for sure.
If he wanted to make an impact he would look to new york. They have the line laid out and where it should go. They just lack the funding. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Avenue_Subway [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 02 2017, @01:28AM
Well, first off, the trip from O'Hare to downtown used to to take exactly 35 minutes. They will need express tracks like the Red Line to shorten it to about 19 minutes, which is really very acceptable without the undue expense of Musk's insanity.
But we also need a line on Cicero to connect the two airports. The locals could use the convenience, and it would be great for business along the avenue.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Saturday December 02 2017, @01:50PM
The downtown hub is not chaos 24/7. After 6pm downtown is a ghost town. During the day it's like any other transit system: busy during rush hour and fine other times. The Loop has many stops that are blocks apart so there are no bottlenecks.
You have put your finger on a limitation of the current transit system as it relates to the airport. It is only convenient to business travel. Nobody lives downtown. At best they live in Wicker Park or Ravenswood, but if your neighborhood is not on the blue line you have to ride all the way in to downtown to veer off in the direction all the way to the airport. That sucks and you'll take a taxi instead.
Your diagonal makes sense for that reason, but would people take it any other time if they weren't going to the airport? And even if they had a line like that would they take it to the airport lugging suitcases unless they were traveling on a shoestring?
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Nuke on Saturday December 02 2017, @03:53PM
Easily and relatively cheaply solved then. Build bypass loops past the lesser intermediate stops so faster trains can overtake slower stopping trains. The faster trains would stop only at the more important intermediate stations (say two or three on that O'Hare line). That is a common type of railway operation, the next best thing to having separate fast and slow lines such as the Piccadilly and District lines on part of the route to London Heathrow Airport.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 01 2017, @11:26PM (2 children)
Many larger cities have 2 or 3 significant airports. Capacity would be better used, and we'd have more redundancy for disasters, if we had them well-connected.
The key to doing this is full integration with the aircraft. That means that train trips get flight numbers, gates, tickets, and luggage handling. The gate is with all the normal ones, in the secure area, with an elevator in place of the normal jetway. You can walk between a train and a plane without passing through security or messing with your luggage.
So then when San Francisco has a runway covered in burning debris and incoming flights get diverted to San Jose or Oakland, arriving passengers can still get to the family waiting in San Francisco. The fact that those aircraft are now at the wrong airport is not too bad either; outgoing passengers can be sent over there via train.
It helps non-disaster situations too. Perhaps better prices or times can be had by using different airports. It helps with stand-by status. It helps with people bumped off of flights.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by dak664 on Saturday December 02 2017, @12:22AM
This site needs a mod category for stupid
(Score: 2) by richtopia on Saturday December 02 2017, @12:27AM
I am having trouble finding the article but I did read an economist agreeing with your mentality. More specifically: identify high volume routes for replacement, with the example being the LA to SF corridor. I'm skeptical of the hyperloop from an engineering point of view, but identifying routes that already have the passenger traffic to support high speed rail is a good starting point.
I do like your idea of direct integration with the airlines. As much as I hate security, allowing a seamless transfer from airplane to hyperloop really would help adoption. Perhaps the first real test site should be connecting two neighbouring airports like you are suggesting. I wonder how "land" easements would work for OAK to SFO, as you could put a lot of the infrastructure over the bay.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 02 2017, @01:14AM (1 child)
but not to each other, that could run up and down Cicero Ave. That would also be very convenient. It would also be nice if they had an express track to downtown, like the Red Line has to Howard. It would be far cheaper than a brand new tunnel, and it could be finished in about 2 - 5 years, as opposed to 10 - 20 years for Musk's shit.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Saturday December 02 2017, @01:40PM
Why would you connect Midway to O'Hare?
Connections between spokes in the transit system would make sense if you were trying to develop suburban hubs like in Orland Park or Schaumburg or something, but does that makes sense for the expense? People in Chicago land commute to work in the Loop, and immediately run back to their suburbs at the end of the day where they have all their services. In the evening the Loop is a ghost town, and there's no reason for an Orland Park resident to go to Schaumburg to dine at Chipotle because they have one in Orland Park.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 02 2017, @01:02PM (1 child)
If this Elon Musk is so successful, why is his hand in my wallet again?
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Monday December 04 2017, @03:26PM
...Did you miss the part right in TFS about this being financed without tax dollars?