Quote:
Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0
I don't know if you are confused or I am, but just so we are clear, the Hyperloop isn't a giant air hockey surface with air coming up from the walls of the tube.
|
Yeah, I know. The point remains the same. Long train, being supported on air bearings, with air scavenged from limited frontal area, in a low-pressure environment. it's just a stupid idea which none of the hyperloop peeps have tried to develop. Because it is a dumb idea that won't work.
Quote:
|
The saying goes, would you rather be in a submarine or in a boat during a tsunami? An underground train in a tunnel surrounded by solid rock, especially one that is pinned to the sides of the tube, is much sturdier than a train moving on the surface on tracks or that's elevated.
|
In an earthquake, the "solid rock" you seem to think is immovable, MOVES. And your puny "low pressure" tubes will move with the moving earth. It is absurd to think that tubes underground should somehow be immune from this as aircraft are immune from tidal waves. It's even worse down here, any seismic movement is by god going to wreck any man-made structures.
Quote:
|
As the RAND article mentions, this would be a massive task, but the economics would pay out over a ground/elevated train, and the benefits over commercial air travel would be clear. Why hasn't it been done?
|
Because it's a fecking dumb idea that won't work.