
How Hyperloop One Went Off the Rails - acdanger
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-15/how-hyperloop-one-went-off-the-rails
======
NickM
There's one thing that keeps bothering me about all the Hyperloop competitions
and startups: everyone seems to be using maglev. This does not match up with
the original Hyperloop proposal, which used an air compressor to suck up
oncoming air and blow it out the bottom, creating a fluid bearing.

Maglev trains have been proposed before; there's nothing particular new or
novel about the idea. One of the bigger problems with maglev is that the
tracks are very expensive. One of the exciting things about the Hyperloop
concept was that the tracks should be much cheaper, since all you need is a
steel tube.

Is it really right to call it a Hyperloop if it eschews the original concept
in favor of building a maglev train in an evacuated tube? Feels like they're
taking a totally different idea and just using the Hyperloop name to generate
hype.

~~~
mulcahey
I'm on one of the hyperloop teams (UCSB) that's using maglev.

We aren't using the type of maglev that's used in maglev trains where the
track is magnetized and super expensive. We're using ArxPax hover engines[1].
They just spin a Halbach array[2] super fast and generate a hovering force off
of an aluminum track.

The winning team of Design Weekend last January, MIT, is also using magnetic
levitation but they are doing a passive version. The track still isn't
magnetized, but their magnets generate their eddy currents just by the
movement of the pod. It sort of "takes off."

The first reason we -- and others in the competition, though not the majority
I believe -- went with maglev is that the we (well, the Mechanical Engineering
students, I'm CS) couldn't find air-skis that worked at high speeds. Elon
mentioned at Code Conference that they'd been tested up to Mach 1.1 but when I
told the ME's of that they said they hadn't found anything they could use nor
any research showing that the air being pushed out of the ski "keeps up" with
the pod at high speeds.

In addition to the speed problem with air skis, they also hover much lower off
the ground than the maglev and require much higher tolerances on the track
(more expensive).

Part of the reason to have the competition is to try a bunch of different
ideas at once and see what works best. I do believe there are plenty of teams
that will be testing air-skis on the track at competition weekend. We'll see
how it goes.

[1] [http://arxpax.com/product/hover-engine/](http://arxpax.com/product/hover-
engine/)

[2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halbach_array](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halbach_array)

~~~
zwieback
In your opinion, how complex are the civil engineering challenges, e.g.
keeping the tube straight?

~~~
mulcahey
I'm honestly not properly educated to answer that. My responsibly on the team
has been controls & networking. I don't think the tube necessarily has to be
perfectly straight as the pod could bank on the turns like a racecar or roller
coaster.

I think the tube itself could be made reasonably cheaply compared to the CA
high speed rail system. We transfer oil in huge pipelines with high pressure
differences so I think it should be pretty feasible to keep it properly
sealed. I'm more worried about the cost of the safety mechanisms and them
being able to secure the land rights.

Elon mentioned at design weekend that initial versions could even use wheels
if they aren't going over ~250MPH.

------
skrause
To me all the Hyperloop startups have just been a scam to take big chunks of
money from investors who believe in any Musk hype. None of them can still
really explain how to overcome the big technical hurdles and I don't believe
the cost estimates for a minute.

~~~
continuations
The technical hurdles are enormous but they are nothing compared to the
economic hurdles.

Just look at the planned LA-SF high speed rails. It suffered delays and cost
overruns over and over again. The latest figure of $68B most likely will not
be enough[1].

And that is a garden-variety high speed rail that has been proven all over the
world for decades. Hyperloop is completely unproven and requires construction
of end-to-end airtight tubes.

If a few hundred miles of vanilla high speed rail costs $70B and counting, how
much would hyperloop cost? $500B? $1T? It'll never work economically.

[1] [http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-bullet-
train-c...](http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-bullet-train-cost-
final-20151025-story.html)

~~~
khuey
Hyperloop boosters also seem to ignore that it will require the same sorts of
right-of-way acquisition as high speed rail, which is an enormous component of
both the cost and political difficulty of building HSR.

~~~
greglindahl
The original Hyperloop paper addresses this issue; HSR can't run down the
middle of I5 for most of its length. I have no idea what the costs will be,
but if you're going to attack Hyperloop for getting this wrong, it'd be a good
idea to attack what they actually proposed instead of something different.

~~~
Gibbon1
The reason HSR rail wasn't routed down I5 is because the I5 corridor is
unpopulated vs the HWY99 corridor which has several major cities.

~~~
greglindahl
HSR can't fit in the _median_ of I5; if you're going to have to buy a huge
chunk of land, sure, you'll run it where there are more people.

------
ythl
I dunno, after watching thunderf00t's video on hyperloops, I'm pretty
convinced that there are fundamental engineering barriers that would have
doomed the company anyway.

If not internal squabbles and lawsuits, the practical laws of nature would
eventually have to be reckoned with (just like with Solar Freakin Roadways)

~~~
valarauca1
Maybe it's just me but I'm more tempted to trust engineers who's day-to-day
job is engineering rather then a Youtuber who replaces vowels with letters.

But strawman/direct attacks aside.

In my experience when one engineer is disagreeing with a team of engineers,
they're wrong or the team a fundamental misunderstanding of the problem
they're working to solve.

~~~
computerex
Thunderf00t isn't just some average Joe on the street. The guy has a PhD in
chemistry and has dedicated a decade to educate the world at large about
matters of science and intellectualism. The world would be a better place if
we had more Thunderf00ts on YouTube.

His videos on the hyperloop are pretty comprehensive and succinct about their
reasoning. Why not watch them instead of mindlessly repeating the same
strawman argument that every other Elon Musk fanboy/fangirl left on his
videos?

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDwe2M-LDZQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDwe2M-LDZQ)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNFesa01llk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNFesa01llk)

~~~
mdorazio
How does a PhD in chemistry make you an expert in mechanical engineering and
fluid dynamics?

~~~
jshevek
"Expert" is a vague term, but the parent didn't claim that it did. Do you
think that one needs to be an 'expert' (whatever that means) in mechanical
engineering and fluid dynamics to make meaningful criticism of a project like
this?

~~~
argonaut
Yes. (for technical criticism)

~~~
jshevek
I hope you don't take that to such an extreme as to think that every line item
of criticism in which Thunderf00t applied general science principles to the
hyperloop paper under discussion is invalid due to a lack of sufficient
technical expertise.

Right? Surely Thunderf00t is qualified to make some of the criticism he made?

I would agree that there are likely a few areas in which his criticism
exceeded his understanding, though I have yet to read a criticism of his
criticism that doesn't mis-represent his claims.

I still don't see the _specific_ relevance of mdorazio's comment to
computerex's.

~~~
erikpukinskis
At this depth of the thread we're not discussing whether Thunderf00t is
correct in his analysis. Computerex claimed that Thunderf00t wasn't "just some
average Joe on the street." His background in chemistry was brought up to show
that he has special standing. Mdorazio countered that from the perspective of
mechanical engineering and fluid dynamics, he is in fact an average Joe on the
street.

Doesn't mean he's wrong, just means he doesn't have special standing.

~~~
jshevek
In my opinion, valarauca's comment is the correct place to start looking at
the context, here. V. started the conversation in a way that could easily be
construed as an effort to discredit Thunderf00t.

To me, Computerex seems to simply be saying "Thunderf00t has sufficient
general knowledge of science to make his debunking videos worthy of watching".

You mention 'special standing', which suggests an 'all or nothing' approach to
categorizing people's status and knowledge, rather than a more reality-
accommodating recognition that expertise and knowledge are a matters of
degree.

Mdorazio did not state what you say they did, they instead asked a leading
question in which words were placed in another person's mouth. Further,
Mdorazio would be incorrect to state that "from the perspective of mechanical
engineering and fluid dynamics, he is in fact an average Joe on the street."
because the average Joe on the street, _relatively speaking_ , is not as
equipped as Thunderf00t to understand issues of mechanical engineering and
fluid dynamics. I'm not saying that Thunderf00t is or is not properly equipped
to make each criticism, just pointing out the problem with 'all or nothing'
style thinking here.

You would be right to question whether Thunderf00t has sufficiently advanced
and detailed knowledge to make each and every one of the criticisms that he
makes, but this would depend on the specific criticism and the specifics of
Thunderf00ts knowledge.

As it happens, not even having a PhD in fluid mechanics would guarantee that
the critic has the relevant knowledge, nor is thinking through the problem
correctly.

------
tomphoolery
There's no way that dude's name is actually "Brogan BamBrogan"...

~~~
rrdharan
[http://www.techinsider.io/how-hyperloop-founder-brogan-
bambr...](http://www.techinsider.io/how-hyperloop-founder-brogan-bambrogan-
got-the-greatest-name-ever-2016-5)

------
grillvogel
i still have not been able to understand why a hyperloop is needed instead of
just using pre existing high speed rail technology like shinkansen

~~~
johnloeber
That's especially the case when you consider that the proposed track across CA
is really a fairly short track on which the Hyperloop would not save a great
deal of time in aggregate: the Hyperloop has a passenger capacity of about 10%
of high-speed rail. It's obvious that given the economic/technical costs the
Hyperloop imposes, it's way more marginally efficient to build a Shinkansen or
TGV-like system.

The Hyperloop might be worth pursuing it it were 10% of the price of HSR, but
that's just not anywhere near the case, as other commenters have duly pointed
out.

------
Sideloader
I don't think this project will amount to much; it almost certainly will not
become part of a widely used mass transit system. It was always a tech geek
vanity project at best, even before the serious trouble started.

------
atemerev
We already have a safer and less expensive mode of transportation: air travel.

Same speed, cheaper, exists today, no need to build tracks :)

~~~
cryptoz
Air travel is a huge pollutant and is literally destroying ecosystems and life
all across the planet Earth. Either airplanes need to get to 0 greenhouse gas
emissions, or we need new types of long-distance and fast transportation. The
hyperloop is a great concept because it can significantly reduce the demand
for high-polluting air travel. There are other ways too, of course - hyperloop
isn't some single savior for everything. But you cannot pitch airplanes as an
alternative. They are not.

~~~
SapphireSun
Huge yes, but still only about 1-4% of total emissions. It's good to make
inroads there, but I'm more worried about cars, power plants, etc. I think the
biggest argument to make in favor of the hyperloop is ease of use, speed, and
price.

After all, maybe we'll have battery powered airplanes some day or maybe we'll
just use gliders for shorter distances though maybe that wouldn't be as great
for a reliable transport.

~~~
dredmorbius
1-4% sounds low. The figure I'm more familiar with is about 6% of global
petroleum use.

IndexMundi gives ~5 million barrels/day of jet fuel consumption, 2012.

[http://www.indexmundi.com/energy/?product=jet-
fuel](http://www.indexmundi.com/energy/?product=jet-fuel)

That compares with 90 mbpd global petroleum consumption in 2012 (BP Annual
Statistical Review, 2016)

That's 5.5% of _petroleum_ consumption, which is about 1/3 of total energy
(BP, 2016). Carbon allocation is to petro, gas, and coal, so 2-4% of total CO2
emissions actually is about right.

OK, you pass ;-)

~~~
SapphireSun
I did some googling beforehand, but I like your math better. ;)

~~~
dredmorbius
I was going to disagree with you but talked myself out of it.

------
sgberlin
Title should be changed to 'Hyperloop One', there are actually multiple
Hyperloop startups.

------
throwaway_VjXo7
Throwaway account.

I'm really disappointed to see Hyperloop One come crashing down, but I'm not
surprised by it. Those who have worked closely with him have learned that
Shervin Pishevar is absolutely toxic. There's not much else I can say without
violating HN's civility rules, but this seems to be an open secret in SV. Some
people love him, some just tolerate him, but many say they will never work
with him again.

