SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
According to early reports the Hyperloop's initial tests (open air tests) were a success at their test track in North Las Vegas. Image.
It didn't go far but it did work. A metal sled accelerated from zero to 116 mph in 1.1 seconds, or about 2.4 Gs of force. It traveled little more than 100 meters, then stopped, kicking up a cloud of sand in the process.
The Verge has a couple articles Here, before the test and test pictures here.
Pencilled in for Q4 2016, however, is what the company is describing as its "Kitty Hawk" moment - a reference to the Wright Brother's first flight - where it plans to run a full-scale test track. Expected to be more than two miles of low-pressure tube, the pod inside should run at over 700 mph if all goes as planned.
Even if the system scales as Hyperloop One expects it to, human passengers may not be welcome, at least initially. The company is looking to cargo transportation as the most likely use for a commercial Hyperloop system - presumably because boxes and crates are less fragile than families - with interest already from a number of countries in a potential logistics system that would run through tubes and underground tunnels.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by frojack on Thursday May 12 2016, @08:21AM
To be fair, my dad had discussed similar designs as far back as the 60s. And no doubt the working basics had been passed on long before then.
Sure, everybody "invented" (in their mind) the lowly pneumatic tube as a means of transportation. This is nothing more than an up-scale of the systems used in large office buildings for almost 100 years till computers made them mostly obsolete. Now you mostly just see them as drive through cashier lanes in banks,.
Right you are, its all about who would step up and actually build a human scale tube, Still, probably not many takers for the first 10 or 20 years till they solve all the potential problems. 700 MPH is "pink mist" speed if something goes wrong. You won't feel a thing.
But sooner or later it will probably be safe enough.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by Nuke on Thursday May 12 2016, @08:55AM
pneumatic tube as a means of transportation. This is nothing more than an up-scale of the systems used in large office buildings
I don't think it is a good idea either; but no, it is not a pnuemaitic tube system.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday May 12 2016, @04:06PM
This test was "open air".
The completed system will indeed use pneumatic tubes, in that there will be a partial vacuum in the tubing ahead of the capsule to reducing drag.
If you don't believe the wiki article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperloop [wikipedia.org]
then just check out Hyperloop's own site:
https://hyperloop-one.com/hardware [hyperloop-one.com] and also https://hyperloop-one.com/what-is-hyperloop [hyperloop-one.com] (on the latter one hover over they little blue green circles in the first cut away view.
Meets the definition of a pneumatic tube easily because there is no hard and fast definition. Some operated on compressed air, some on vacuum, and some on both,
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 12 2016, @10:04AM
Sure, everybody "invented" (in their mind) the lowly pneumatic tube as a means of transportation
Small difference being dad had a Masters in thermodynamics from Cal. Tech., and the "pneumatic" aspect mattered less than getting rid of wind resistance. The difficulty from his perspective was synchronizing closing sections of tunnels to be in a near vacuum right when the train passed through so there wasn't the waste and cost of a constant vacuum. The smarts bit was controlling the amount of air to act as a brake and propulsion, so short of overcoming initial inertia, the whole thing could be run with air pressure alone.
So no, not everybody.
Cargo (as in things) would be the logical application. Design it around shipping containers, and you've knocked billions off of the cost of transport. Pink mist doesn't happen until far into the future.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Thursday May 12 2016, @04:22PM
> Design it around shipping containers, and you've knocked billions off of the cost of transport.
This.
If you can't drop a container straight inside a hyperloop carrier without opening it, you don't integrate with the container system, and therefore you can't really win big.
Shipping containers save handling money and time. Airline containers save handling and time. Heck, even moving companies bring you pods to save handling time.
If you have to open the box to transfer stuff at both ends of the tube, you lose your value proposition.
(Score: 2) by turgid on Thursday May 12 2016, @08:40PM
What about the illegal immigrants hiding in the shipping containers? Every so often a few dozen of them turn up dead or dying at our ports. It's a serious problem. Putting them in one of those tubes wouldn't be beneficial to their health.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Tuesday May 24 2016, @06:10AM
Rather than placing a shipping container inside a vacuum carriage, would it be feasible to place one or more vacuum carriages inside a shipping container?
1702845791×2