Announcement any minute now according to Elon Musk&#x27;s twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/366964441159438337" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;elonmusk&#x2F;status&#x2F;366964441159438337</a>Edit: First article - <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-08-12/revealed-elon-musk-explains-the-hyperloop" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.businessweek.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;2013-08-12&#x2F;revealed-elo...</a>Edit2: Site OP linked to is up, but may be cached for you. Try <a href="http://www.spacex.com/hyperloop?1" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.spacex.com&#x2F;hyperloop?1</a>

for the second time now, yes. see <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6201160" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=6201160</a> which was closed

I think a lot of people (including me) are excited by what he has to say. By all indication it should have showed up 7min ago.

SpaceX has a history of failed launches before settling into a routine of spectacular success.Hopefully their inability to publish this page on time will prove to be another example of the same. ;-)

It should have been already published (at 1:30 pacific time.)
<a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/366964441159438337" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;elonmusk&#x2F;status&#x2F;366964441159438337</a>

A &quot;coming soon&quot; page is at the top of HN?

I have never been more excited for a coming soon page.

I think the SpaceX IPO is planned for about 5-10 years from now - that&#x27;s not too long. The only indication we have is that MCT will be making regular trips to Mars before SpaceX IPOs, and they seem pretty set on that happening in the next decade.

Probably because SpaceX has more autonomy since it doesn&#x27;t need to meet the expectations of shareholders -- the same reason Musk isn&#x27;t planning on an IPO with SpaceX for a really really long time.

They just quickly needed a webpage to display the data.

Elon said that he isn&#x27;t going to work on his Hyperloop idea. <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/musk-too-busy-for-hyperloop-2013-8" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.businessinsider.com&#x2F;musk-too-busy-for-hyperloop-2...</a>

He has said that he will not do it himself, just publish the idea and let someone else do it.

EDIT: It was posted both places, so I wouldn&#x27;t read into it at all (<a href="http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/hyperloop" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.teslamotors.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;hyperloop</a> <a href="http://www.spacex.com/hyperloop" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.spacex.com&#x2F;hyperloop</a>)-----------I wouldn&#x27;t read into that. Musk has said he has no intention of developing it; he probably just needed a place to put it. SpaceX makes as much sense as anything else.That being said -- hopefully he lied when he said he had no interest, in order to quell speculation until the announcement. Kind of like how Apple says they&#x27;ll never ever launch certain things... right up until they do it.

I hope this happens. I&#x27;ve only started reading the .pdf and cannot claim I will understand everything but it seems like a very promising read.
If Musk can partner with Richard Branson and other billionaires (along with contributions from people on the web) it could happen!

This is not going to happen. It is a very rich, successful engineer musing at what might be possible if we thought radically different about transportation. I&#x27;m as big a fan of Elon Musk&#x27;s projects as anyone, but the weight assigned to these napkin calculations is ridiculous.[Edit: If anything, this might lead people to take this type of eccentric and radical design more seriously. But given the criticism Musk&#x27;s engineering ventures have had before, I wouldn&#x27;t count on it.]

Feedback is welcomed on these or any useful aspects of the Hyperloop design. E-mail feedback to hyperloop@spacex.com or hyperloop@teslamotors.com.- from the pdf

It is also cross-posted on Tesla<a href="http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/hyperloop" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.teslamotors.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;hyperloop</a>

It&#x27;s on the Tesla site as well. <a href="http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/hyperloop" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.teslamotors.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;hyperloop</a>

From the PDF:&quot;Feedback would be most welcome
–
please send to
hyper
loop@spacex.com
or
hyperloop@teslamotors.com
. I would like to thank
my excellent compadres at both companies for their help in putting this
together.&quot;

It&#x27;s very interesting that this is a SpaceX project. Why not Tesla, or another company entirely?

thanks! here&#x27;s the actual pdf: 
<a href="http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/hyperloop_alpha-20130812.pdf" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.spacex.com&#x2F;sites&#x2F;spacex&#x2F;files&#x2F;hyperloop_alpha-201...</a>

Cache needs busting <a href="http://www.spacex.com/hyperloop?a=b" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.spacex.com&#x2F;hyperloop?a=b</a>nm, they fixed it

<a href="http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/hyperloop_alpha-20130812.pdf" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.spacex.com&#x2F;sites&#x2F;spacex&#x2F;files&#x2F;hyperloop_alpha-201...</a>

It&#x27;s now up on <a href="http://www.spacex.com/hyperloop" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.spacex.com&#x2F;hyperloop</a>

It&#x27;s there now. No longer a holding page

Comments on the whitepaper: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6201728" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=6201728</a>

Not building the HSR that is envisioned is the win.

That&#x27;s an argument in favor of a useful HSR system. But politics have resulted California&#x27;s HSR system being deliberately pessimized; it may do more harm than good to the HSR cause, right?

So, we have &quot;light shed&quot; on the current &quot;debacle&quot; and neither system gets built. That&#x27;s a win?Yes, preventing a debacle is a win.

California will get more crowded, but it will continue to be a disaster of urban planning, limiting the utility of HSR.It&#x27;s mind boggling to me that the California HSR isn&#x27;t being built from DC to Boston instead.

So, we have &quot;light shed&quot; on the current &quot;debacle&quot; and neither system gets built.  That&#x27;s a win?  HSR was first commerically available in 1964.  Yes, it got really expensive waiting 50 years.  I imagine it&#x27;ll be even more expensive in another 20-30.  California is going to get even more crowded.

I wouldn&#x27;t be so fast to make that declaration. Elon Musk, Tesla, and SpaceX are pretty influential players right now, and I don&#x27;t think anyone reading this white paper are anything less than wide eyed at the possibility that the future of travel is written right here and we could build it, for cheaper than the current slow expensive system.Influential people and money people and politicians are all going to read this and say Sounds great. Elon Musk? I&#x27;m listening. 7 Billion? Go on. And scientists are going to chime in, and universities, and people always forget the global reactions. Momentum.I&#x27;m going to keep my faith that this idea has legs.

Um, pressure your representative to support this idea instead of a high-speed rail system?

It was approved by a ballot measure, so in this case it may be the &quot;idiocy&quot; (or will) of the voter.<a href="http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_1A,_High-Speed_Rail_Act_%282008%29" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;ballotpedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;index.php&#x2F;California_Proposition...</a>

The problem is that, at least with the CA high speed rail system, the design is all theoretical at the moment.  It may be a brilliant idea, but but moving from the core ideas in the document to actual working, build-able products,  can be a slow process.  And given the state of where CA is on their project, that may not put them on the same window.

Jerry Brown&#x27;s political career is coming to an end, so there are no long term political consequences for him. He&#x27;s also traditionally been an opponent of government waste. I don&#x27;t think it&#x27;s unreasonable to believe that he would choose an unproven but promising technology over our existing useless high speed rail project. The assembly is another matter. If you think hyperloop is interesting, write and call your state assembly member and encourage them to consider this plan, that&#x27;s what I&#x27;ll do.

How about spend the full amount, but on more links? That way, you&#x27;re employing probably more people, both short term and long term.

Are you seriously saying that government wont consider Hyperloop because they are averse to innovation? On the contrary, &quot;big government&quot; has been the largest engine of innovation the past century. NASA has put people into orbit, and on to the Moon, has launched the first space stations, and made several robotic probes to other planets and the depths of space. Musk founded SpaceX which has managed to do a fraction of the things NASA has decades after them. In 1972, the Rand corporation, financed by the United States, thoroughly researched a &quot;Very High Speed Transit System&quot; that is similar to Musk&#x27;s proposal. Sure there will be political difficulties implementing something like The Very High Speed Transit System or Hyperloop, but realistically the government is the only entity that has the foresight, money, and motivation to undertake such a project.

The reason this will never be built is because it&#x27;s incredibly unproven. At least with HSR the unknowns are sort of understood and the costs can be calculated. Nobody knows what the unknown costs are with Hyperloop.Not to mention safety. Nobody is going to just trust Musk to say it&#x27;s safe. There will be a decade of trials to test it before it even gets green light approval for a small practically useable section.

&gt; as far as political repercussions, california is not a two party state any moreThe Republicans haven&#x27;t yet adapted to the people of the State taking away their ability to roadblock budgets from the minority, which is a crutch they&#x27;d come to rely on to avoid dealing with the difficulty of trying to build a minimum winning coalition in CA while at the same time toeing the line of the national party.I&#x27;d be surprised though if they haven&#x27;t started returning to being an effective opposition by the 2014 elections.

Having run for state office three times in Minnesota, I can respond to some of this.Politicians aren&#x27;t all afraid to take risks, especially when they believe a particular policy they like will live on and be remembered.Our former governor Jesse Ventura overcame incredible resistance and media scorn to get our first light rail line built. Almost all casual observers thought major health care reform was impossible in Washington. These things actually happened.The key to passing a good policy is to reduce the risk. Politicians love projects where someone else was the guinea pig for them and&#x2F;or someone else pays for studies and prototypes. Usually, they look for other units of government that have done something very similar with great success.If I wanted to get Hyperloop to pass, I would first aim to table discussions on high speed rail for the proposed route. You would find allies among politicians who don&#x27;t want to spend any money on transit, usually to appease highway contractors.Secondly, I would immediately aim to seek R&amp;D money for a high-profile demonstration project with plenty of funding for a study to project potential costs and impacts. This effort should even begin before the high speed rail bidding is tabled. I would leverage the demonstration results in the media and build a grassroots and lobbying organization around support for a Hyperloop.Finally, I would seek advice from experts to craft a model bill with appropriate requirements for the bidding process.

Interesting point that big government provoked the advancement of the hyperloop idea - counterintuitive idea, and clearly yes. but any idea like this will need government cooperation. The real test of big government will be how they respond to the hyperloop.magic response: &quot;of course we may be wrong, we&#x27;ll look into this immediately.&quot; and then they decide to build it.likely answer: praise, perhaps even an evaluation, then disregard as unrealistic a year from now.why would &quot;big government&quot; ignore this idea? fairly simple: risky and unproven, for a politician, in a career where risk is not related to upside; and probably more important is the ability to control $70bn in spending to private citizens and contractors - far more valuable to their careers (leading to donations and influence) than spending a smaller amount (a mere $7bn) on fewer contractors. For the most part, the hyperloop contractors would not be the same guys who have been donating to politicians for the past decade in support of the train.so yes, big government and the natural corruption of a large budget (donations-&gt;spending with favored constituents) will likely lead to the status quo - a ludicrously overpriced train.as far as political repercussions, california is not a two party state any more, so there&#x27;s no one to capitalize on the idiocy of the folks in power. i guess, we reap what we sow.

As currently envisioned CA HSR is likely to be more expensive and slower than current air travel. This is before the virtually certain cost overruns. To be competitively priced it would require large subsidies but still would be no faster than alternatives.That said like you I would love to see a superior alternative to the current situation but CA HSR is probably not it.Edit: added some references<a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_15746975" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.mercurynews.com&#x2F;top-stories&#x2F;ci_15746975</a><a href="http://www.fresnobee.com/2013/08/01/3419259/high-speed-rail-board-adopts-policy.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.fresnobee.com&#x2F;2013&#x2F;08&#x2F;01&#x2F;3419259&#x2F;high-speed-rail-...</a><a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-california-bullet-train-delays-20130812,0,3537563.story" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.latimes.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;opinion&#x2F;opinion-la&#x2F;la-ol-califor...</a>

The same reason san francisco has built like 100 or 200 new housing units in the past year, and the same reason the california coastal commission was being sued (and found unconstitutional, etc):California has a very large amount of regulatory burden compared to almost anywhere else in the US. High speed rail there is likely to cost overrun by a massive factor, and under deliver by a massive factor, and both, for no actually good reason, instead, only theoretically good ones.

&gt; Can you please clarify why the high speed rail is likely to be a debacle ?I don&#x27;t believe that high speed rail will necessarily be a debacle.But the route was largely chosen for political considerations. It was decided downtown San Jose, Fresno, and Bakersfield must have stations. (This requires an additional long tunnel, and urban construction is much more expensive.) The route takes a detour through Palmdale[1], an underdeveloped part of Los Angeles County.The &#x27;straight shot&#x27; route down I-5 that Musk proposes was also considered for HSR, and rejected even though it would have been much cheaper and simpler to construct.[1] <a href="http://www.cahsrblog.com/2013/06/the-truth-about-tejon/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cahsrblog.com&#x2F;2013&#x2F;06&#x2F;the-truth-about-tejon&#x2F;</a>

Among other things, rail is worthless in CA, because you need a car to get anywhere anyway.If you can afford to rent a car at the end of your train ride, you can afford a plane ticket.In my opinion, most likely, the CA rail proposal is just a political folly being undertaken by corruptocrats who have ideas to profit from it.Yes, the rail would be useful for poor people who want to visit family, but that is not a business case, and does not justify harvesting tens of billions from the innocent citizens of CA. (Even if a tyranny of the majority voted to do it.)

Can you please clarify why the high speed rail is likely to be a debacle ?It seems pretty clear that California needs it and generally HSR is a pretty sensible infrastructure investment.

You need government backing to acquire the land.

The proposal calls for the line to built alongside I-5, which requires government involvement.

&gt; but why to ask California State for subsidy? Why not to build it using private funds?Because you can&#x27;t, in practice, acquire the rights of way necessary to build a substantial railroad&#x2F;hyperloop&#x2F;freeway or other major infrastructure project of that type without government (specifically, without use of eminent domain).

(1) CA is much better positioned to straighten out the land use issues. It needs to use the existing I-5 right of way, it needs to tunnel through some mountains, and it probably needs to eminent domain some additional bits of land for pylon bases where I-5 curves too sharply. No matter what, this is a project that has to pass the legislature in order to get built.(2) A CA-sponsored bond issue must be by far the lowest cost way to finance a $7B infrastructure project that&#x27;s amortized over 30 years.

For the same reason that Musk needed a huge, free government loan to get Tesla off the ground: without the government, he&#x27;d be less rich.

Bill gates can reach for his wallet and fund this. He won&#x27;t even notice it.Someone get me his phone number right this moment.

Well the issue, apart from getting the land to build, is probably that the public benefits a great deal more than a company can profit off.  There are always going to be intangible benefits from huge infrastructure projects like this that a company can&#x27;t monetize.  Hence what is economically a good idea for the nation or state as a whole, is not necessarily a good idea for a private investor.

the investors in the business world.few investors would touch this. It doesn&#x27;t fit into any investment category that&#x27;s approved.There are infrastructure funds but they&#x27;re looking for sleepy assets. Stuff like toll roads and ports that have an established operating history and are supposed to be low risk.This is a whole different animal. It&#x27;s almost infrastructure VC. I don&#x27;t see how this fits in any part of the institutional world. That leaves wealthy individuals and I don&#x27;t think there&#x27;d be a lot of interest there. They&#x27;re looking at Berkshire and steady growth vs. an investment in speculative infrastructure. I could see $10M investments but I think it&#x27;d be hard to get people to put a big chuck of their net worth into it, which is what you need (i.e. you need a couple people putting in $1-2B). Furthermore, historically public transportation hasn&#x27;t been very profitable. Realistically you probably need the state to build it.

but why to ask California State for subsidy? Why not to build it using private funds? I&#x27;d imagine that if this is economically sound idea there must be potential investors lining up to have their share in the Project? The estimated cost is $7B. Now, Musk just needs to make a few calls to his friends at Google, Amazon, etc. Can&#x27;t these guys just form a company together just to build it?Maybe I&#x27;m naive... or maybe Musk for all his genius is focused on the Government grants too much instead of being focused on the investors in the business world.If this brings profit, everybody want to own piece of the pie, no?

&gt; take into account electrification costs (because it does get cloudy)Did Musk say his Hyperloop wouldn&#x27;t be tied to the grid?

&gt; CA HSR replaces&#x2F;upgrades two metropolitan rail systems (Caltrain&#x2F;Metrolink) in addition to connecting SF (as opposed to Oakland!) and LA, requires no R&amp;D, is supposed to handle significantly greater ridership, has detailed cost estimates which include things like take into account electrification costs (because it does get cloudy), support facilities (because there is maintenance of these cars), administrative buildings (because someone has to run the system), bypassing&#x2F;rebuilding overpasses (which are all over I-5) that are in the way and grading land.Not to mention their estimates actually include going into downtown SF and LA, unlike Musk&#x27;s $6B figure.

It is presented to provoke and I think you&#x27;re right, it does look like an attempt to derail CA HSR.Instead, I think of it this way... if it&#x27;s so cheaply do-able, then - do it! Sounds like an easy money making idea if you can build it for the figures proposed. While you may only need to charge $20 each way to break even, why not charge double what it costs to go the next most fast, convenient way, and you would make bank! I mean, who wouldn&#x27;t do this if it works as envisioned? It&#x27;s a genius business plan, right!?So do it! Some rich bold genius! Build us a hyperloop - so cheap and obvious and do-able! And whenever we get to HSR, we&#x27;ll build it so it connects to the awesome LA-SF express hyperloop.

West Oakland is 10 minutes from downtown SF (Embarcadero station, nearest to the HSR terminal) by BART, and you can take any eastbound train, so you rarely have to wait more than 2-3 minutes during the day to catch one.  The area is already set up for rail, and land is relatively cheap.  It&#x27;s a fantastic location for it.  The only reasons to go to SF proper are politics and pride.

If ALL Musk does with the Hyperloop announcement is shed more light on the potential debacle that is to be our $70b+ high-speed rail in California, we owe him a debt of gratitude.Really? Because it looks like this is an attempt to derail CA HSR using a proposal for an experimental technology that offers a fraction of what CA HSR does, but is potentially faster.CA HSR replaces&#x2F;upgrades two metropolitan rail systems (Caltrain&#x2F;Metrolink) in addition to connecting SF (as opposed to Oakland!) and LA, requires no R&amp;D, is supposed to handle significantly greater ridership, has detailed cost estimates which include things like take into account electrification costs (because it does get cloudy), support facilities (because there is maintenance of these cars), administrative buildings (because someone has to run the system), bypassing&#x2F;rebuilding overpasses (which are all over I-5) that are in the way and grading land.

&quot;If ALL Musk does with the Hyperloop announcement is shed more light on the potential debacle that is to be our $70b+ high-speed rail in California, we owe him a debt of gratitude.&quot;We would owe a debt of gratitude to a hypothetical public transport project for helping to obstruct or kill a real public transport project?

&gt; And who says that big government stifles entrepreneurial innovation?&quot;A brilliant exploration of new ideas in business argues that government is behind the boldest risks and biggest breakthroughs&quot;<a href="http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/32ba9b92-efd4-11e2-a237-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2blGsoJgA" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ft.com&#x2F;intl&#x2F;cms&#x2F;s&#x2F;2&#x2F;32ba9b92-efd4-11e2-a237-00144...</a>I don&#x27;t have much of an opinion on this topic, since it seems to me that any large concentration of money and smart people produces innovation (so do lone geniuses). But I thought this article was interesting.

This may very well be at the heart of his submission, especially since he is the first to point out that most of the real kinks have not been worked out.What do most of us in the general public really know about how projects like the high speed rail get on the ballot. A lot of people have their suspicions, but we have to ask ourselves if there was a competitive bid process to determine the best solution.I, for one, would have voted to throw money into future technologies over current rail solutions. Mostly because I shudder to think how much current tech will be old news in ten years when the high speed rail is completed (if at all).If we pursue the hyperloop or similar tech, and whether it can be completed or not, at least it would be a first of it&#x27;s kind and on the cutting edge.

&quot;In the case of the Hyperloop, Musk started focusing on public transportation after he grew disenchanted with the plans for California’s high-speed rail system.&quot;And who says that big government stifles entrepreneurial innovation?If ALL Musk does with the Hyperloop announcement is shed more light on the potential debacle that is to be our $70b+ high-speed rail in California, we owe him a debt of gratitude.PS - Direct link to the Hyperloop plans .PDF <a href="http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/hyperloop_alpha-20130812.pdf" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.spacex.com&#x2F;sites&#x2F;spacex&#x2F;files&#x2F;hyperloop_alpha-201...</a>

Don&#x27;t speak too soon. There is quite a bit of fluff amongst that 57 pages. This is mostly conceptual.

Personally, I&#x27;d prefer a video explaining this to the layman.

To me those sentences don&#x27;t really fit together. 57 pages is a lot so let&#x27;s hope it actually is not mostly fluff. I won&#x27;t read that so I would be much happier with a 100 word tldr.

&quot;Mostly fluff&quot; is not exactly this guy&#x27;s style.

Holy hellA 57 page documentI expected mostly fluff.

I think his vision is based on Futurama: electric cars -&gt; spaceships -&gt; elevated transportation tubes -&gt; hover cars -&gt; robots. I bet if the government still goes with the traditional rail plan, then Elon will build &quot;his own hyperloop&quot;, adding &quot;blackjack...&quot; and other stuff.

If this is going to be running above ground, how do they purpose to find space to even build this?<a href="http://mappery.com/maps/Los-Angeles-California-Transportation-Map.gif" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;mappery.com&#x2F;maps&#x2F;Los-Angeles-California-Transportatio...</a>My only guess would be to build it vertically. . which is were everything is going anyways, right?

The pumped air is also used to create an air cushion around the pod to keep it suspended at high speeds. Also, solar panels line the top of the tube so that it is self powering.

Yes but they need to be 5 miles apart so they would board approximately every 30 seconds and carry 28 people each.

Yes, a pod would depart every 2 minutes or less, which puts about 23 miles between them.

Yes, but no discussion of how you&#x27;d bring the system down if one broke down mid-trip or how you&#x27;d bring it back up. The individual cars only carry power to maintain speed, no to accelerate, so if they have to stop because something goes wrong, a whole bunch of people are stuck in the middle of nowhere without a toilet (or air?)

Does it support multiple pods in the tube at once?

From my skimming of the PDF, it sounds like a pneumatic tube transportation system with a compressor fan on the front of the vehicle that moves high-pressure air from the front to the back maintaining a low-pressure state around the vehicle.  Kind of like an Earth-bound Alcubierre drive.

These days, politicians have to stay bought. And any competitor or detractor can derail your effort by buying off one of the local politicos.This is one of the biggest reasons northern CA doesn&#x27;t already have a bunch of such systems already in place.

Given the sort of heavy infrastructure required and their related permits, I&#x27;d assume that whoever actually starts an effort to build a HL-like system, will have local politicians on board.

It would be more interesting to see a company with the technical (and probably political) chops to pick it up. GE comes to mind because they have the industrial and scale out know how in multiple system areas needed for hyperloop. But maybe it would interfere to much with their air and train businesses. Then again, if you established yourself as being able to build all components of a hyperloop system, I imagine that could be a long lucrative business market...The question for GE and other similar industry companies which have build-in capability to construct this is if they can lift themselves out of the comfort their existing markets.

&gt; Hyperloop is considered an open source transportation concept.I&#x27;m glad they didn&#x27;t just let the idea die on a drawing board somewhere because of a lack of time&#x2F;money. Now, someone has to just develop it faster than someone else can legislate against it.

Not only that, but they would also use a lot of technology that Tesla&#x2F;SpaceX now has a lot of experience in: battery, eletric engines and turbines, the metal for the ski pads, etc. There&#x27;s a reason why he is making the plan completely free: he has a lot to benefit if this ever really happens.I would love to see this happen though, and to see Elon become a trillionaire.

I also enjoyed that the vehicle carrying option could hold larger vehicles &quot;like the Tesla Model X&quot;.

(Figure 1). The only system that comes close to matching the low energy 
requirements of Hyperloop is the fully electric Tesla Model S.Shameless plug of the day :) So far it does not break too much of the laws of physics and is indeed workable.

From a telecommunications stand point, we were just starting to get handovers to work on high speed rail, now we have to get it to work on super sonic transport?  come on now :D

I think that&#x27;s handled by the rooftop solar cells.

How much power does it take to maintain a vacuum of 1&#x2F;1000atm in a tube hundreds of miles long?It doesn&#x27;t require any power, if there are no leaks. The power required will be determined by the amount of leakage that is considered tolerable to the system.

To me, a 1&#x2F;1000 atmosphere vacuum system IS a really leaky machine :) Anecdotally, the machine I used to work on would gleefully chew on that for hours idling while we scrambled to find the hiss on the system.It made an awesome sound when it ground into the atmospheric pressure on initial pumpdown, but at about 1&#x2F;100 atmo it got bored (mere minutes), and without additional high speed stages the mechanical pumps would backwash at 1&#x2F;10000 atmo (though it would take a while to get from 1 hPa to 0.1 hPa, many multiples of the time it to to get from 100 hPa to 1 hPa).Edit: fixed units (0.001hPa is still leaky for base pressures but a completely different thing from 0.001atm).

Sections 4.2 and 4.5. It estimates the cost of vacuum pumps for the tube and stations at $260 million. I haven&#x27;t seen if they&#x27;ve broken out costs to maintain the pumps, but it specifically also mentions compensating for minor leaks with higher pump capacity to be able to continue operating and fixing smaller leaks as part of routine maintenance.

But that&#x27;s at a pressure of 100Pa (1&#x2F;1000 atm). How much power does it take to maintain a vacuum of 1&#x2F;1000atm in a tube hundreds of miles long? It seems this point is skipped over in the whitepaper, so perhaps its negligible.Edit: yes I was referring to the power to sustain a vacuum in a leaky system, of course no power is required to maintain a vacuum in a perfectly sealed system :)

The aerodynamic power requirements at 700 mph (1,130 kph) is around only 
134 hp (100 kW) with a drag force of only 72 lbf (320 N)Mind blown.

In an interview last we he stated that his next company would be vertical take off supersonic electric jet, if he decided to start another company.  He said he&#x27;s not likely to start another company any time soon.

I think it&#x27;s interesting to devote so much space in the introduction to hypothetical supersonic air travel. Might this be what Musk actually intends to do next?

For some reason Elon Musk is extremely enamored of welding technology. I remember seeing a page on an old version of the SpaceX site containing a high-level overview of the Falcon 9, where they went out of the way to mention how great circumferential friction stir welding is compared to whatever NASA used to do. And here he is bragging about it being the large stir welded thing ever created: <a href="http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2009/01/musk-ambition-spacex-aim-for-fully-reusable-falcon-9/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nasaspaceflight.com&#x2F;2009&#x2F;01&#x2F;musk-ambition-spacex-...</a>. It&#x27;s a revolutionary vehicle in many regards, but Elon seems to have a particular soft spot for welds.

Orbital welders can be used in pipes on any size (smaller sizes often need special welders). Not sure what the record is but they are commonly used on water pipes that are several meters in diameter. Should work fine for the Hyperloop tube. Seems like all the required technology is proven but I&#x27;m sure we will hear more from all the experts in the various fields.

Orbital welding on this scale and much larger is already done in the offshore oil industry.

Not really. It&#x27;s a valid welding <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_welding" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Orbital_welding</a>), but I imagine it might be quite a task to scale it up to pipes as large as would be needed for this project.

Well how else would you propose welding them together?

But in China vast expanses of high speed track are built on pylons. Here is an example of one such track (and some unfortunately placed apartment blocks): <a href="http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/pb-110811-bullettrains-11a.photoblog900.jpg" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;msnbcmedia.msn.com&#x2F;j&#x2F;MSNBC&#x2F;Components&#x2F;Photo&#x2F;_new&#x2F;pb-1...</a>

Railway track built above ground has to support weight of the cars, which seems significantly higher ....

I do not get this part. These are not advantages of tube v railway track, because a railway track can also be built above ground and can also be build from prefabbed sections. In fact I would think that building a railway track would be much cheaper than building an airtight tube.

I immediately imagined drones in FTL. Some shoot lasers, others shoot beams, and a few can repair your own ship while orbiting around it.

<pre><code> The key advantages of a tube vs. a railway track are that it can be built above
 the ground on pylons and it can be built in prefabricated sections that are
 dropped in place and joined with an orbital seam welder.
</code></pre>
Did anyone else read this and imagine laser beams fired by satellites?

That seems like a pretty optimistic estimate, but I suppose its a guessing game for such a hypothetical system anyways. Also, for comparison BART ridership tops up at over 100 million a year[1], and 6 million fly between LA and SanFran annually[2].[1] <a href="http://www.bart.gov/docs/barttimes/BTimes0707.pdf" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bart.gov&#x2F;docs&#x2F;barttimes&#x2F;BTimes0707.pdf</a>[2] <a href="http://cahsr.blogspot.com/2009/10/la-sf-nations-second-busiest-air-route.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;cahsr.blogspot.com&#x2F;2009&#x2F;10&#x2F;la-sf-nations-second-busie...</a>

Eventually hits up against this problem:<a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=DenWKRgqzWMC&amp;pg=PA67&amp;lpg=PA67&amp;dq=schelling+ski+lift&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=dMjA9zdq94&amp;sig=0Chc-xZxKhla1GMrY0AGEd_2GAQ&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=i1QJUpTBFOL0yQH60YGIDg&amp;ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&amp;q=schelling%20ski%20lift&amp;f=false" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;books.google.com&#x2F;books?id=DenWKRgqzWMC&amp;pg=PA67&amp;lpg=PA...</a>

From the report: &quot;...with capsules departing as often as every 30 seconds from each terminal and carrying 28 people each. This gives a total of 7.4 million people each way that can be transported each year on Hyperloop.&quot;

Thanks.  By comparison HSR in Europe carries 300-500 people with three minute headways (according to wikipedia).

&quot;The Hyperloop is sized to allow expansion as the network becomes increasingly
popular. The capacity would be 840 passengers per hour which
more than
sufficient to transport all of the 6 million passengers traveling between Los
Angeles and San Francisco are
as per year. In addition, this accounts for 70% of
those travelers to use the Hyperloop during rush hour.
The lower cost of
traveling on Hyperloop is likely to result in increased demand, in which case
the time between capsule departures could be significa
ntly shortened.&quot;p.11

So, it&#x27;s a two-lane highway where the cars are 5 miles apart? How many people will be able to use this thing?

One of the few times I&#x27;ve read the word &#x27;pylon&#x27; without being concerned with some video game.

$6B buys a lot.  If your day job is getting people to Mars, a system like this is a relaxing side project.

Doesn&#x27;t mean building the first one should be expected to be easy.

&gt; something like this has never been built beforeThat was true of everything, once.

Very good point. Another possibility is some forward-thinking government paying for the initial R&amp;D effort to have one of these built in their state&#x2F;country.

&gt; And remember - Musk contrasts $6b to what he estimates could possibly grow to $100b for the current proposal, so even if they end up needing to double their budget, they&#x27;d still be off by an order of magnitude.)Why should we think that Musk&#x27;s estimates for a technology which still isn&#x27;t well defined (read the &quot;Future Work&quot; section at the end of the document) are reliable even to within an order of magnitude, and why should we accept Musk&#x27;s assumption that the actual cost of the HSRA will be 50% higher than its official estimate?

That may be true, but the only thing you really need is to find a company that is willing to build this while chipping in some of the R&amp;D cost.I don&#x27;t think such a company would be hard to find because if they get this done, they are now the only vendor of a highly desirable technology. Pretty sure they&#x27;ll be able to get back that early investment... and then some.(And remember - Musk contrasts $6b to what he estimates could possibly grow to $100b for the current proposal, so even if they end up needing to double their budget, they&#x27;d still be off by an order of magnitude.)

I am skeptical of the proposed cost were someone to actually build this. Sure, the cost of materials, labor, engineering, etc. is probably accurate, but something like this has never been built before. What about the cost of research and testing? Not to mention there doesn&#x27;t currently exist an industry of contractors to build most of the parts of this system, which is not true in the case of traditional high speed rails. Citing the cost to build something like the Hyperloop as the entire cost of developing it seems a bit disingenuous.Not that it still wouldn&#x27;t be comparable to the cost of a high speed rail system.

That could definitely make sense. Vegas might even put up some capital to make it easier for people to visit and put their hard earned dollars to good use.I can also imagine that from an infrastructure standpoint building across desert you&#x27;d run into fewer obstacles, although that might be wishful &#x2F; oversimplified thinking.

Might Tony Hsieh champion a group pushing for LA to Vegas? I imagine SF-Vegas might have a roundabout route.

So who wants to start a company? I&#x27;ll uh...come up with the business plan.Seriously though, this would be an incredible project to work on. I wonder, outside of Elon Musk, who would take on the challenge?

Well the pod has compressor - so it literally can hit the fan :)The only thing I really dislike so far is the battery pack in the pod. I would have wanted to see something more elegant instead. And this way we halve the weight of the pod.

What happens currently on a high-speed rail system?  I suppose there&#x27;s a lavatory in the HSR (e.g.: France&#x27;s TGV).

Each chair is actually a toilet. Problem solved.

Same thing that happens if you develop unexpected gastric issues during a 30 minute plane flight, I&#x27;d imagine, since you&#x27;d spend the whole time strapped in for take-off and then landing.

The same thing that happens when you develop gastric issues on a 30-minute helicopter tour, as the minister in a wedding ceremony, or in a dentist&#x27;s chair.

sbashyal pointed out in another thread that you can&#x27;t use the restroom on a commercial airline during take-off or landing either, which I thought was a great point.

what happens when you develop unexpected gastric issues mid-30 minute journey?

The journeys currently envisioned by the hyperloop are more appropriate for trains, and Acela (for example) is actually pretty roomy

You can get up and walk around on a plane.

How is that any worse than standard commercial air travel? Plus, really, you are talking about a thirty-minute journey.

Look at the illustration on the next page of the PDF. That&#x27;s not even a two-door car back seat; that&#x27;s an F1 cockpit.

Doesn&#x27;t look any more cramped than the back seat of a car.

Well, there&#x27;s a low grade vacuum outside so you probably don&#x27;t want to.It&#x27;s a failure of the onboard steam tanks that scares me. (&quot;The steam is stored onboard until reaching the station. Water and steam tanks are changed automatically at each stop&quot;)I don&#x27;t want to think about what the result of that would look like for the cleanup crew. Eeeewww.

How do you get out of there in case of fire? If the doors open like that I don&#x27;t think it would work while inside the tube wouldn&#x27;t it?

It&#x27;s also scary that the passengers would suffocate if the life support system failed.

They&#x27;re talking about pods that can hold cars, so it doesn&#x27;t seem that way. The cost does increase, but doesn&#x27;t look to be a deal breaker.

How well will it fit the obese &amp; large American, something that is around ~%40 of the population now?

It&#x27;s no so different from lying in a bunk bed. Isn&#x27;t it great to have a half hour nap during morning commute?

I&#x27;m not claustrophobic, but this image ever so slightly terrified me: <a href="http://i.imgur.com/lGD9bUP.png" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;i.imgur.com&#x2F;lGD9bUP.png</a>I have to wonder, would making the capsule the size of a small subway car completely destroy the economics of it?

I get the feeling the space in the passenger car (which is limited) was designed by people who build space capsules.

There is in fact a proposed passenger plus vehicle capsule:The passenger plus vehicle version of the Hyperloop will depart as often as the passenger only version, but will accommodate 3 vehicles in addition to the passengers. [p12]The passenger plus vehicle version of the Hyperloop capsule has an increased frontal area of 43 ft2 (4.0 m2
), not including any propulsion or suspension components. This accounts for enough width to fit a vehicle as large as the Tesla Model X. [p15]Tubes would be bigger, and the system would cost more.

That capsule (<a href="http://images.bwbx.io/cms/2013-08-12/0812_Hyperloop_605.jpg" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;images.bwbx.io&#x2F;cms&#x2F;2013-08-12&#x2F;0812_Hyperloop_605.jpg</a>) looks like a claustrophobic&#x27;s nightmare.Otherwise very, very cool.

I like how the head of the project called him to make sure he knows it&#x27;s not the absolute slowest or most expensive per mile only nearly so.

it&#x27;s a 35 min commute so those things are not necessarily required. Amenities can be built outside the boarding station

Unless it breaks down. In which case the &quot;toilet&quot; question might become quite pressing, quite quickly.

LA -&gt; SF in 30 minutes. Why would you need a toilet?

The paper mentions two tube diameters, supporting &quot;more versatile&quot; Hyperloop capsules in the larger version.Also, with a 35-minute trip time, these concerns are well within the realm of &quot;hold it&quot; till the next stop.

The distance is just about what I commuted on a bus for many, many years, also with no facilities.In peak hour it would probably be fine, when everyone is fairly sensible and not drunk. But after hours, I&#x27;ve had quite a few uncomfortable bus rides due to the various anti-social behaviours of fellow passengers. That was with the hand-brake of a driver who obviously isn&#x27;t getting involved, but can avoid escalating behaviour by stopping the bus or calling authorities.I have great faith in the technology! I just wish I had as much faith in the people riding inside it :)

No toilets on commuter buses either and people ride them 45minutes to 1+ hours everyday with no issues.You&#x27;re stuck in the &quot;long trip&quot; &quot;it&#x27;s like a train&quot; framework.It is neither.

You can&#x27;t get out of your seat during take off or landing on commercial plane either, and that easily takes 30+ minutes.

&gt; No toilet, and no way to get off, or even really stand up?Seriously? It&#x27;s like laying in a not quite horizontal bed for 30 minutes. If you can&#x27;t plan your bathroom usage 30 minutes ahead of time, then don&#x27;t use this transportation system (or wear a diaper). I can almost always hold it for 30 minutes after I am really feeling the urge to go. With 12-14 million trips per year, will there be accidents? Certainly. So that capsule gets diverted to be cleaned. Big deal.&gt; At least on BART you can move away from the crazyIt looks like those spaces are small enough that only 1 person could easily interact with you. If that&#x27;s a problem, they could probably build in plastic dividers. Or you could just buy two tickets. If you can&#x27;t tolerate that level of risk, then again, don&#x27;t ride this thing.I can assure you that there are plenty of people who are not bothered by these issues.

No toilet, and no way to get off, or even really stand up?  I know some personal jets lack such facilities, but they&#x27;re not exactly open to the public.  At least on BART you can move away from the crazy...

From the pictures, 1.10m heigth with 1.35m width looks more right; in any case, there&#x27;s no simple typo:If the feet are correct, (6.11 ft), then it should be 1.86m, not 1.10m (or 2.10m as you suggest.)If the meters are correct (1.10m), it should be 3.61 ft (not 6.11 ft).

Yeah that should definitely be 2.10 meters

&quot;Hyperloop Passenger Capsule
The maximum width is 4.43 ft (1.35 m) and maximum height is 6.11 ft (1.10 m). With rounded corners, this is equivalent to a 15 ft2 (1.4 m2) frontal area, not including any propulsion or suspension components.&quot;At a first look I didn&#x27;t get that the proposed passenger capsule would be so small. That&#x27;s pretty cramped.Edit: Isn&#x27;t the the ft to m conversion for the height wrong?

How long would it take to get from San Fran to LA?Edit: nevermind, it is about 30 minutes

This is such a cool concept. I was so hoping he would build this.

Time is money too. The drive from SF to LA is about 5.5 hours (per Google Maps). 5.5 hours of stress and frustration, compared to 30-40 minutes of hyperloop...

It&#x27;s kind of cool that Elon Musk is competing with himself here -- Hyperloop vs. a 3rd generation Tesla (which should be even cheaper than $45 one-way per car, including depreciation and electricity.)The real problem, even once you add self-driving cars, is I-5&#x27;s limited capacity.

Well it has to beat a standard commuter car (~$45 one way@34mpg) by a significant margin to be useful for consumers.What about freight?

$20 is the unsubsidized 20-year-amortized cost of building the thing, there would be additional costs to run it, not the least of which being insurance.

That&#x27;s the estimated cost to build it.   I&#x27;d guess double it for operating expenses - maintenance, security personnel, etc.

$20 plus operating costs. That is, the $20 is just the additional cost to pay off the capital cost over $20 years, and doesn&#x27;t include any of the amount necessary to pay the operating costs.Airline tickets would be pretty cheap if all they were paying was the 20-year amortized capital cost of the airplanes + airports, too.

Thought this was amazing: $20 for a one-way, 35 minute trip from SF to LA.

Ah – a turboprop tubular-ground-effect vehicle.

Wow, yeah, that basically ruins a significant part of the appeal to me.

I can&#x27;t wait to get frisked by one of Musk&#x27;s minions!

WRONG.Such machines are still in use and besides, neither machine machine has provably been better than plain old metal detectors.<a href="http://tsastatus.net/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;tsastatus.net&#x2F;</a>

The TSA phased out all the X-ray backscatter machines due to radiation concerns. All the scanners at airports use millimeter wave radar now. Still the same privacy concerns, but no ionizing radiation and thus no possible health concerns.

You&#x27;d really only have to scan for explosives.Knives or even guns would only pose a problem to the few passengers in the capsule with you (yeah, you might be able to shoot a hole through the tube, but it would take a LONG TIME for a bullet hole to let in enough air to affect the pressure in a LA-SF-sized tube).It&#x27;s not like you can hijack the thing. :-)

&gt; 4.5.6. Human Related Incidents
Hyperloop would feature the same high level of security used at airports. However, the regular departure of Hyperloop capsules would result in a steadier and faster flow of passengers through security screening compared to airports.Ugh. That only seems feasible if back-scatter scanners are the only option (but would you still have to take your belt off and put all metal in a little bowl?).

Some interesting tidbits:<pre><code> The total trip time is approximately half an hour, with capsules 
 departing as often as every 30 seconds from each terminal and carrying 28
 people each. This gives a total of 7.4 million people each way that can be 
 transported each year on Hyperloop. The total cost of Hyperloop in this 
 analysis is under $6 billion USD. Amortizing this capital cost over 20 years and 
 adding daily operational costs gives a total of about $20 USD (in current year 
 dollars) plus operating costs per one-way ticket on the passenger Hyperloop.

 For aerodynamic efficiency, the velocity of a capsule in the Hyperloop is 
 - typically: 300 mph (480 kph) where local geography necessitates a tube bend radii 
 &lt; 1.0 mile (1.6 km)
 - 760 mph (1,220 kph) where local geography allows a tube bend &gt; 3.0
 miles (4.8 km) or where local geography permits a straight tube.</code></pre>

Or 3 million people donating $2000 each for huge discounts on long term access.  I would donate $10,000 if the discount was steep enough on long term use and included use of future expansions of the system.

That&#x27;s more than the population of the cities it would connect.  Maybe if it was NY to LA.

30 million people donating 200 each...totally doable.

I think he should start a ticket pre-sale on kickstarter and see if he can be the first person to reach $6 billion for a project.

Probably the same thing that would happen if these things happened inside a high speed rail.

I&#x27;m an advocate for not living in perpetual fear too, but I couldn&#x27;t find specifics of how unexpected passenger behavior would be handled. Assuming it&#x27;s as cheap and easy to operate as it seems, I really want the Hyperloop to succeed and be installed in as many metro areas as possible, but for the Hyperloop to succeed, it has to be resilient and not overly optimistic, and not assume everyone onboard will sit and stay still for the whole trip.Humans don&#x27;t always behave as they&#x27;re expected to by the engineers of a system. That happens in software, happens in hardware, and in public transportation too.[EDIT]
I think these paragraphs give an idea of how an incident would be handled:&gt;If a capsule were somehow to become stranded, capsules ahead would continue their journeys to the destination unaffected. Capsules behind the stranded one would be automatically instructed to deploy their emergency mechanical braking systems. Once all capsules behind the stranded capsule had been safely brought to rest, capsules would drive themselves to safety using small onboard electric motors to power deployed wheels.&gt;All capsules would be equipped with a reserve air supply great enough to ensure the safety of all passengers for a worst case scenario event.&gt;In the event of a large scale leak, pressure sensors located along the tube would automatically communicate with all capsules to deploy their emergency mechanical braking systems.&gt;Hyperloop would feature the same high level of security used at airports. However, the regular departure of Hyperloop capsules would result in a steadier and faster flow of passengers through security screening compared to
airports. Tubes located on pylons would limit access to the critical elements of the system. Multiple redundant power sources and vacuum pumps would limit the impact of any single element.

Americans seem to be the most worried about suicide bombings out of anybody else, yet America has probably seen the least suicide bombings per capita of any country in the world.Not that I approve of many of the things we do to &quot;prevent&quot; them, but...Perhaps worrying about preventing certain things sometimes actually helps reduce them?

What happens if a brawl erupts inside a moving bus or taxi?What happens if a suicide bomber boards a train or bus?What happens if a suicide bomber rents a car and crashes it into you as you walk along the sidewalk?Rather than living in perpetual fear, you could try making the world a place where people who can&#x27;t get food or work aren&#x27;t trying to blow you up as a last resort?Americans seem to be the most worried about suicide bombings out of anybody else, yet America has probably seen the least suicide bombings per capita of any country in the world. (yes, exaggeration)

Regarding a brawl, there&#x27;s not really much space for much of a fight.

Exactly.  Best case, you&#x27;ll kill 28 people.  The other capsules will stop, and the hyperloop will be out of commission for awhile.  Definitely not spectacular.  They&#x27;d be better off attacking a more densely populated area.  Much more hysteria...

&gt; What happens if a suicide bomber boards the Hyperloop?What&#x27;s the point? Bombing this system would be unspectacular, and thus probably unlikely. Terrorists are in it for the spectacle.

Regarding suicide bombers: all pods are equipped with emergency brakes, and wheels as a (slow) backup transportation method. Life support on each pod is powered by redundant batteries. Capsule depressurization can be dealt with airplane-style, with oxygen masks, or by doing an emergency repressurization of the whole tube.

&gt; What happens if a brawl erupts inside a capsule?Put plastic dividers between all the seats like they have in police cars. Problem solved.

I&#x27;m impressed, but I&#x27;m afraid Hyperloop&#x27;s operation is modeled after airplanes, while the actual use of the system would be closer to a city bus.&gt;All capsules would have direct radio contact with station operators in case of emergencies, allowing passengers to report any incident, to request help and
to receive assistance. In addition, all capsules would be fitted with first aid equipment&gt;Typical times between an emergency and access to a physician should be shorter than if an incident happened during airplane takeoff. In the case of the airplane, the route would need to be adjusted, other planes rerouted, runways cleared, airplane landed, taxi to a gate, and doors opened. An emergency in a Hyperloop capsule simply requires the system to complete the planned journey and meet emergency personnel at the destination.What happens if a brawl erupts inside a capsule? What happens if a suicide bomber boards the Hyperloop?

My dad has worked on at least one proposal for linear rail in California in the past. Emailed him the whitepaper for comments. Delivery not guaranteed :)

Also, I wonder what HSR incidents he&#x27;s referring to. The Spanish relatively low-speed human error crash? Systems like Japan&#x27;s Shinkansen have never had a fatal accident, despite operating at the edge of technology for 50 years. I don&#x27;t think a derailing accident is at all likely on a modern system like California&#x27;s plan or the UK&#x27;s HS2.

And if the tube breaks behind you, you&#x27;d just arrive sooner.

If the tube bursts so wide that the capsule could be ejected from it, the inrush of air would likely be so great that capsules probably wouldn&#x27;t even make it out. The bigger concern would be that they could decelerate too quickly.

&gt; Risk of derailment is also not 
to be taken lightly, as demonstrated by several recent fatal train accidents.Interesting. No comment on the potential outcome of a passenger-filled capsule being ejected from a burst tube on high pylons at 350mph.

Made me think of a scifi book I read recently where terrorists attacked the hyper-speed rail system by leaving a bowling ball on the &quot;tracks&quot;...

I would read the pdf before commenting, this is a little more than some pictures.

i would say that it is marketing if the guy did not own SpaceX. Still I am skeptical. Every child can draw neat pictures and speak about vacuum.

It&#x27;s in a big, steel tube. You won&#x27;t see bus-sized things going at nearly the speed of sound; you&#x27;ll see a big, steel tube.

Bus-sized chunks of metal are flying over your head every day. They&#x27;re called &quot;airliners&quot;.

of course, once it hits you it doesn&#x27;t make much difference. However, the faster and&#x2F;or more massive an object is, the bigger is the radius of damage that it can do, hence the more likely is for you to be affected by it.For example, a sufficiently fast and massive object can derail and hit a large building killing many, while a 80Mph SUV hitting a building wall will still, most likely, not be able to bring down the whole building.

Lets be honest, the difference between 700mph and 80mph head across the median on is negligible.  Either way you are almost certainly dead or crippled.  Past a certain speed the only real difference is how large of an area your body is spread out over; dead is dead.

Appreciate Elon Musk for this idea. But do you really want a bus sized hunk of w(ever)tf this is made out of zipping by you at 700mph?

&quot;Btw, this is not the very latest version. Will post an updated version with several late arriving corrections in a few hours.&quot; <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/367028946426019840" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;elonmusk&#x2F;status&#x2F;367028946426019840</a>