Richard Branson's Virgin Group Invests in Super-fast Hyperloop One Transport System (cnbc.com) 60
An anonymous reader shares a report: Richard Branson's Virgin Group is investing in Hyperloop One, a company developing the super-fast transport system originally conceptualized up by Elon Musk. Hypleroop One is re-branding itself as Virgin Hyperloop One, and Branson is joining the board, the billionaire British investor and entrepreneur announced Thursday on CNBC from London. Virgin Hyperloop One will focus on a passenger and mixed-use cargo service. Last month, Hypleroop One raised $85 million in new funding, and that includes the investment from Virgin. Branson refused to breakout the numbers. Breaking ground on a commercial hyperloop in two to four years is possible if "governments move quickly," Branson said in a "Squawk Box" interview. So far, no government has approved a plan for a hyperloop system. The Virgin founder also said that building a hyperloop tube above or below ground is "cheaper" and "faster" than a traditional rail network. The idea of the transport system -- conceived in 2013 by Musk, the head of both electric automaker Tesla and SpaceX -- works by propelling pods through tubes using magnets reaching speeds akin to those of airplanes.
Dutch Government wants a test-track (Score:5, Interesting)
Jeopardy!: Austin Rogers loses today. (Score:1)
He loses to Scarlett Sims. The FJ answer is "What's A Wonderful Life."
This Ain't Amtrak (Score:2)
Apparently Hyperloop is not receiving any Government funding.
This is good news because it eliminates all manner of stupid requirements and it shows that the investors have confidence.
Specifically, I expect they will not be required to serve some stupid Congress Representative's district even thought that would be uneconomical...ala Amtrak.
Which will be first? (Score:2)
Jerry's High Speed Train from nowhere to nowhere, or the Hyperloop?
Re:Musk "conceived in 2013?" (Score:5, Informative)
The system Musk conceived (Hyperloop Alpha) is not a vactrain, and more to the point, would not work in a vacuum. Hyperloop One is based on air bearings for suspension to avoid the need for (expensive) maglev and to avoid the need to maintain a hard vacuum (which requires significant pumping) - simultaneously overcoming two of the largest problems with vactrains. The drag problem for non-hard-vacuum tubes is overcome in Hyperloop Alpha via battery powered compressors, which boost the air bearings.
"Hyperloop" One, however, is a standard maglev vactrain, and an old concept. So are most of the student competitors on the "Hyperloop pod design contest" (otherwise known as "Cleverly disguised talent scouting for SpaceX" ;) )
Re: (Score:2)
> ) is not a vactrain, and more to the point, would not work in a vacuum
Neither did the vactrain. In fact, it used air in the tube as its braking system.
Re:Musk "conceived in 2013?" (Score:4, Interesting)
If you're talking about "so little air that the vehicle - without a compressor - only slowly drifts down in velocity", then you're talking about a hard vacuum, and incompatible with Hyperloop Alpha. If you are talking about a mild vacuum, with a compressor shunting the built-up air ahead of the vehicle into air bearings, cite an example of that from before Musk.
And FYI, Hyperloop Alpha only drifts down between accelerator segments; faster deceleration is by deceleration segments and (at lower speeds) physical / magnetic braking.
Re: (Score:2)
> If you're talking about "so little air that the vehicle - without a compressor
> - only slowly drifts down in velocity",
Have you bothered to read a single article on the topic? Apparently not.
The compressor in this case was a series of movable doors that opened and closed as the train moved through the tunnel. It was only partially evacuated and in the case of braking the doors in front were closed at the station and the buildup of the air in front of the train brought it to a stop.
So, no, it didn't
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What "this case"? You haven't named a "this case"; "vactrain" is a general concept for a maglev train in a hard vacuum, not a specific implementation.
That would never fly in the real world. Now all that air you let in has to be pumped out down to the level of a hard vacuum.. What moronic design are you reading?
Re: (Score:2)
That would never fly in the real world. Now all that air you let in has to be pumped out down to the level of a hard vacuum.. What moronic design are you reading?
Maybe one of the original designs from the 1800s, operating on the same principles of pneumatic tubes? Just ignore those pumping losses...
Re: (Score:2)
[Citation needed]
Re: (Score:2)
1) Air bearings weren't invented in the 1960s.
2) "Air bearing != Hyperloop" any more than "Transistor = iPhone"
Come back to me with an actual example of a train inside a partial vacuum tube (rather than hard vacuum, to avoid the need for excessive pumping systems, but not open either, to allow for high rate of travel), floating on air bearings (to avoid the need for maglev), with a battery powered compressor simultaneously feeding the bearings (which can't be fully passively fed due to the low pressure) and
Re: (Score:2)
[Citation needed]
You remember wrong.
Seriously? The fact that air bearings already exists makes that prior art to Hyperloop? Nobody was talking about having invented air bearings.
Re:Musk "conceived in 2013?" (Score:5, Informative)
How am I supposed to prove a negative? The person is asserting that there exists an example from before Musk. It is incumbent upon them to present what they're talking about, not to ask me to search the entire Earth for evidence of something that does not exist so that that I can prove my case via exhausting the entire search space. Same with their assertion that Musk was "originally pushing a vac train". I've read everything that's come out of Musk and SpaceX about the topic of Hyperloop, and no such thing occurred. If they think it did, they need to show where it occurred.
Hyperloop has three parts, all of which are integral to the concept, because the concept does not work with any one of them missing:
1) Craft suspended by air bearings
2) Air bearings fed by a battery-powered compressor
3) System sealed inside a a) mostly evacuated, but b) not hard vacuum tube, in order to allow for extreme speed travel.
Without any one of those, Hyperloop Alpha does not exist. Without air bearings, it has to rely on maglev, which is too expensive. Without the compressor, not only would the air bearings not work in the low pressure air, but a "wall" of air would build up ahead of the craft and present too much drag. Without 3a, high speeds cannot be reached. Without 3b, #1 and #2 don't work, and the cost for pumping becomes excessive.
If you're not talking about the integration of #1, #2, and #3, and how they all tie closely together, you're not talking about Hyperloop Alpha.
There is no meaningful invention in our modern age that invents all of its component parts. An invention is how you build off of existing technology to create something that enables new possibilities.
Again: if you, or anyone else, thinks they have prior art to a system combining #1, #2 and #3, present it. Put up or shut up.
(Note: this exact same request has been made on pretty much every single Slashdot thread since the concept came out. Not a single person has ever "put up").
Re: (Score:2)
This is degenerating into absurdity. You claimed someone invented it before him. There are two possibilities here.
1) You can tell me who.
2) You can ask me to search for every piece of data that currently exists and ever has existed on Earth to see if any human who has ever lived has ever thought up the concept.
Are you seriously telling me that #2 is the proper route to take?
It most definitely has not.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can't buy stock pipe with that precision, but you can polish to that precision with a rotary polisher. Which was part of the Hyperloop Alpha design. Lots of mechanical systems involving pipe (such as hydraulic and pneumatic cylinders) require vastly better (orders of magnitude) engineered tolerances on diameter variation than the air bearings did.
But, perhaps there was some reason that they couldn't pull it off at scale.
Re: (Score:2)
Ed: That should read "Hyperloop Alpha is based on...."
Re: (Score:2)
Hyperloop One is based on air bearings for suspension to avoid the need for (expensive) maglev ...
"Hyperloop" One, however, is a standard maglev vactrain, and an old concept.
You seem to contradict yourself here.
I think you mean Hyperloop Alpha was based on air bearings, while the spin-off, Hyperloop One, uses magnetic levitation. A third option, Hyperloop Cheetah uses wheels, and substitutes low pressure steam for low pressure air within the tunnel.
To be honest I see no benefit to maglev, but could see a combination of steam bearings and a low pressure steam filled tube as having potential. Having said that there are many downsides to the steam option which pretty much balance
Well, then just maybe. (Score:3)
Re:So far, no government has approved... (Score:4, Interesting)
The tweet was followed shortly thereafter by [twitter.com]:
But while the former tweet was shared by 75k people, the latter was only shared by 1,5k. Even worse was how so many people still insist on pretending he was talking about the city level rather than the DOT, which has confirmed their discussions, adding "We have had promising conversations to date, are committed to transformative infrastructure projects, and believe our greatest solutions have often come from the ingenuity and drive of the private sector." You don't start seeking approval on an interstate project at the city level. But hey, any chance to bash Musk, so go for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, the first tweet talked about "verbal govt approval", not "signed off on a NE corridor track". But again, keep up distorting whatever he says to meet your needs.
Re: (Score:1)
No, there's a meta at play. GP poster is the most slavish Tesla fan on Slashdot, now here defending his dear Elon on a different topic.
It was not intended as a rebuttal. You couldn't seriously have thought that's what it was intended as.
Re: (Score:1)
A tech in search of a need (Score:2)
So much excitement over building a maglev train in a depressurized tube, with all the difficulties that entails, and so many claims that it's going to be more cost effective to implement than traditional rail.
I get the excitement, I don't buy the claims. Right of way issues are similar, safety issues are greater.
If you want something revolutionary, just build an elevated half-pipe and run high-speed 3-person pods on non-standard powered rails, and add computerization for per-pod routing, dynamic formation
Re: (Score:2)
Richard Branson, in particular, seems to be more of a professional gambler. His successes make enough to compensate for his failures, but betting on any particular venture's success is a bad strategy.
Re: (Score:2)
Since they apparently are not relying on government funding, I don't really see why you need to get your panties in a wad.
Re: (Score:2)
My post didn't take a cent of public money, so I don't really see why you needed to get your panties in a wad.
Re: (Score:2)
Virgin.... Slip-n-slide... water lubrication.... backyard...
I swear, when I was in my teen years, I would instantly have though of a fitting joke. I'm getting old...
Atlas meh'd (Score:2, Troll)
The Hyperloop: BUSTED! (Score:3, Interesting)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
*All* new technologies? No just the idiotic ones that won't work.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Being smug used to be part of his charm, now he is just annoying.
Part of his charm? Really??
Thunderf00t is, and always has been, a gaping asshole. His redeeming virtue is that he's very intelligent and does solid technical analyses.
I take his technical assessments seriously and think they're valuable even when if I disagree with his conclusions sometimes. (But his social commentary too often borders on "unhinged", so I pay no attention to that.)
That said, "charm" is one thing that is complete foreign to him.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah the answer is C. It's amazing to me how much bad science is out there.
Good! (Score:2)
So they next new technology will be another 'series of tubes'.