This animated map shows how radically a high-speed train system would improve travel

Again, construction of the first full scale test was started this year

 

Again, it's hype.

People love to throw money at scams. It's like a favorite thing for humans to do.

 

You've gone from calling the Korean test "more hype than loop" because it isn't full scale, to addressing the first full scale test by simply posting "Again, it's hype"

seems reasonable

 

Do you really need to discuss the physics of why it's hype? The video I posted touched on many of the false claims. I'd be glad to go in depth.

Think about the monumental difference between creating and maintaining a vacuum in a small scale model vs creating a vacuum in a full scale tube.

Think about the square cube issue of increasing the scale of this model.

Think about the ramifications of a tube rupture anywhere along the entire length of the tube while humans are inside...

 

Here's what happens the first time someone hits the hyperloop with a vehicle, or god forbid the pod strikes an inner wall

 

The Economist ranked the U.S. as having the best freight rail system in the world. But you simply can't run passenger trains on the same rails as freight trains. For reasons of both safety and comfort, passenger trains have to run on banked tracks but you can't run freight on banked tracks for obvious reasons (stacked freight would slide off the cars).

 

The trains don't generate power. It's supplied externally.

Regenerative braking is not the generation of power. Regenerative braking is just conservation of externally supplied energy.

You can't run a train on regenerative braking. You can only recoup some of the energy you would have wasted slowing the train down. Due to entropy you recoup less than you used to accelerate the train.

 

Not to mention the dispatch problems associated with slow moving freight sharing the same rail as a passenger rail humping along at 200 mph.

Not many train conductors that have successfully passed the Bo Duke school of train jumping.

 

I did not say say bullet trains run on regenerative breaking, you are correct, it is merely a technology to conserve energy. Modern bullet trains save energy by both recharging from external sources and generating new energy while they are operating. Overall they require less than a quarter the amount of energy that a diesel engine train requires

You seem to be heavily influenced by a youtube video, if you want to learn something about the feasibility of the physics of a hyperloop train, then I suggest reading this analysis from NASA. You might not find it as entertaining, but it's a lot more informative on the feasibility of a hyperloop than the youtuber you keep bringing up.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20170001624/downloads/20170001624.pdf

In short, a full scale hyperloop system that achieves a top speed of 613 is perfectly feasible.

 

The trains you are talking about don't generate energy. They consume energy from the grid. The trains that do generate their own energy are ironically ours.

Our diesel electric trains generate their own power independent of the national grid. So despite the fact that the rail isn't electrified, the trains themselves are electric.

If you want to get into a research war I'm your huckleberry. I have instructor access to all the good journals. You might have to pay to read them though.

Yup. A 200 year old idea coming to a train station near you. Any day now. Just another few hundred billion should do it.

 

I'm sorry, but calling the hyperloop a 200 year old idea is like calling a helicopter a 500 year old idea. It's true to some extent, minus the modernizations to the original idea, and the technological advancements made during that time. In regards to whether or not the physics of the idea is feasible, we do know that it is feasible up to speeds of 613mph, but going beyond that speed it would gradually become less efficient and practical. The cost of operating would be significantly cheaper than air travel, it is establishing the infrastructure that is the challenge. It would have to be a near straight line route from one city to the next, which would be an imminent domain nightmare to work through. An underwater route similar to the channel tunnel between England and France might actually be an easier method

 

This paper set out to answer two key questions: What are the key technical, environmental, economic and human considerations in assessing the potential application of hyperloop technology in a location? What are its likely urban and regional planning and transport policy implications? Musk's ideal hyperloop is said to reach ultra-high speeds of around 1,200 km/h, though evidence in the literature suggests more likely speeds of around 500 km/h due to the practical realities of engineering in different locations coupled with limits of passenger comfort. It will have a relatively low carrying capacity per departure due to each pod having only 28 seated passengers. Theoretical peak hour capacity of 3,360 passengers depends on 30 s headways which, for safety reasons, may need to be 80 s, reducing peak capacity to 1,260 passengers. Furthermore, evidence suggests that companies have underestimated the costs involved with the system. These and other technical, environmental, and human considerations were questioned throughout the paper and for the most part, the positive claims for hyperloop are disputed or at least suggested to be overstated.

Based on the findings of this paper, we conclude that there exist many positive claims about hyperloop, mainly by its proponents, but for each one of these claims there are counter-claims, mainly by experts in the rail field, which cast severe doubt on the viability of hyperloop both as a technology and as a tool in helping to reshape urban regions to reduce the time and space separation between cities. The review of existing literature in this paper has attempted to systematically bring together both sides of the story and to compare the claims of each. Based on this approach, we conclude that the counter-messaging about hyperloop is convincing and therefore warrants a high degree of caution in considering it for deployment anywhere.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frsc.2022.842245/full