Photos of the world’s only full-scale Hyperloop test track

Most people think hyperloop is an Elon Musk idea.

It's not.

Daryl Oster, founder of Evacuated Tube Transport Technologies invented the idea and has all the relevant patents.

Well Oster patented an idea and rough design and licenses it out.
Musk bought a license (cheap) and refined the designs to be practical, and is now funding a working model.
So technically the Hyperloop itself is a Musk idea.
Oster was the first one to patent something.
And before him Robert M Salter came up with the idea loosely.
 
Most people think hyperloop is an Elon Musk idea.

It's not.

Daryl Oster, founder of Evacuated Tube Transport Technologies invented the idea and has all the relevant patents.
It's not so much a case of him inventing it but rather him bringing it back to life. The idea went from absurd to multiple companies wanting to implement it thanks to him. It's a bit like SpaceX didn't invent rockets yet made a massive difference.
 
Is this criticism below valid? Apart from anything else can you imagine if this thing broke down somewhere and you're stuck in a metal tube, in a vacuum, potentially a long way from any access point?

[video=youtube;RNFesa01llk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNFesa01llk[/video]
 
Is this criticism below valid? Apart from anything else can you imagine if this thing broke down somewhere and you're stuck in a metal tube, in a vacuum, potentially a long way from any access point?

Imagine flying 10s of 1000s high in a metal tube at 100s of km/h and it broke down, and you're stuck in that metal tube, as it's falling to earth...
 
Imagine flying 10s of 1000s high in a metal tube at 100s of km/h and it broke down, and you're stuck in that metal tube, as it's falling to earth...

Valid point, but the difference here is that if the vacuum breaks down, everything in the tube breaks down, potentially catastrophically?
 
Valid point, but the difference here is that if the vacuum breaks down, everything in the tube breaks down, potentially catastrophically?

The vacuum being broken wouldn't necessarily cause the structure to fail...it would slow the train down if enough air gets into the tube.
 
All ground breaking technology and ideas have been met with a chorus of nay-sayers. And it still got built.

This can certainly be done. Technically it is possible. The limits will be costs.

I am not going to waste 0.5 h to listen how something cannot be done, but take for example a leak in the tube - what happens to the pods inside? An increase in air pressure will merely mean an increase in air resistance, so the pods will slow down. Nothing that will implode or fall from the sky.
 
Is this criticism below valid? Apart from anything else can you imagine if this thing broke down somewhere and you're stuck in a metal tube, in a vacuum, potentially a long way from any access point?

That was my thought from the beginning as well,I was looking for the answer in these pictures but it seems the access points are still not going to always be directly above/in line with the pod so how would you get to them?
 
All ground breaking technology and ideas have been met with a chorus of nay-sayers. And it still got built.

The nay-sayers have a valid and under-appreciated role. Progress needs the balance of having people find reasons why something cannot be done, if only to help identify the potential pitfalls that may be overlooked by a positivity-at-all-costs groupthink. A good entrepreneur values the naysayers because they do a lot of the work for them by identifying potential issues that he may not have considered.
 
All ground breaking technology and ideas have been met with a chorus of nay-sayers. And it still got built.

This can certainly be done. Technically it is possible. The limits will be costs.

I am not going to waste 0.5 h to listen how something cannot be done, but take for example a leak in the tube - what happens to the pods inside? An increase in air pressure will merely mean an increase in air resistance, so the pods will slow down. Nothing that will implode or fall from the sky.

There is a difference between taking a sound idea and making it reality then trying to do something that clearly has massive fundamental issues.

It is simply not a very good practical idea and creates more problems than it solves.
 
That was my thought from the beginning as well,I was looking for the answer in these pictures but it seems the access points are still not going to always be directly above/in line with the pod so how would you get to them?

Not to mention that if the vacuum is intact you will not be able to survive outside of the pod, and the pod itself will not have unlimited air supply. So what is the plan if there is some kind of breakdown or accident 100km from anywhere inside a tube with no atmosphere? I suppose that they could stop the entire tube and pressurize it until they can rescue those passengers? But if flying makes you nervous and claustrophobic this will certainly be 10x worse.
 
Well Oster patented an idea and rough design and licenses it out.
Musk bought a license (cheap) and refined the designs to be practical, and is now funding a working model.
So technically the Hyperloop itself is a Musk idea.
Oster was the first one to patent something.
And before him Robert M Salter came up with the idea loosely.
I consider the idea to come from Pneumatic tubes(human transport in pneumatic tubes were already proposed in the early 19th century)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pneumatic_tube

It was just shelfed because of better technology in cars and trains. Now we might be at the stage were we have the technology to attempt tube travel again.

I think they are approaching it from the wrong angle though. Rather than focus on people and the extreme speeds. They should try and sent cargo down the tube at a fast speed, but not the crazy speeds they are suggesting. With the focus on cost to be cheaper than road or rail tranport.
 
Not to mention that if the vacuum is intact you will not be able to survive outside of the pod, and the pod itself will not have unlimited air supply. So what is the plan if there is some kind of breakdown or accident 100km from anywhere inside a tube with no atmosphere? I suppose that they could stop the entire tube and pressurize it until they can rescue those passengers? But if flying makes you nervous and claustrophobic this will certainly be 10x worse.


Here is an article
with a bit more info on the Hyperloop as well as the ETT system mentioned by Arthur.

Both Oster and Musk say safety will be paramount. They have answers for sudden depressurization or tube breaks, generally involving controlled ventilation to use outside air to slow capsules and then isolating the problem with air gates so as not to lose vacuum completely.

Plenty of solutions available in case of emergency.
 
I'm fascinated by people who can think of problems, but can't envision solutions.

So, you've got a pod surrounded by a vacuum, broken down in a tube. One the vacuum is artificial and can be quite easily filled by stopping the process by which it's induced and having a mechanism that pumps in air. Two, the problem of being a distance away from a hatch can be solved by putting an escape hatch in the pod and walking once a normal atmosphere is restored to the tunnel. Of course no system is perfect and complete failure of all systems is always a possibility, but really, safety wise, the hyperloop doesn't pose too many more safety issues than the Channel tunnel and quite a few less considering that you could get into most points on a hyperloop with a blowtorch and a spade (if needs be).

Anyway, far smarter folks than the likes of most of us will be giving all this considerable thought I have no doubt.
 
I'm fascinated by people who can think of problems, but can't envision solutions.

So, you've got a pod surrounded by a vacuum, broken down in a tube. One the vacuum is artificial and can be quite easily filled by stopping the process by which it's induced and having a mechanism that pumps in air. Two, the problem of being a distance away from a hatch can be solved by putting an escape hatch in the pod and walking once a normal atmosphere is restored to the tunnel. Of course no system is perfect and complete failure of all systems is always a possibility, but really, safety wise, the hyperloop doesn't pose too many more safety issues than the Channel tunnel and quite a few less considering that you could get into most points on a hyperloop with a blowtorch and a spade (if needs be).

Anyway, far smarter folks than the likes of most of us will be giving all this considerable thought I have no doubt.

The biggest concern isn't the pod breaking down, it's the issue of the actual tube failing. A sudden rupture on a vacuum chamber is catastrophic. The current prototype they're building doesn't exactly exude confidence when you see how flimsy those tubes are.
 
The biggest concern isn't the pod breaking down, it's the issue of the actual tube failing. A sudden rupture on a vacuum chamber is catastrophic. The current prototype they're building doesn't exactly exude confidence when you see how flimsy those tubes are.

You mean how flimsy they look. It is just the prototype.
 
Two, the problem of being a distance away from a hatch can be solved by putting an escape hatch in the pod and walking once a normal atmosphere is restored to the tunnel.

I'm not so much thinking up problems as looking for reasons why I wouldn't freak out in one of these things. As far as I can see in whatever designs have been made public the pod is virtually flush against the walls of the tunnel and the front and back contain the propulsion system so it's not immediately clear how you would get out of an escape hatch on the pod.
 
Back
Top