“trains are to engineering as crabs are to biology. on a long enough timescale, if you optimize almost any system enough, you eventually get some form of either a train or a crab”
Everyone was perfectly happy for these containers to travel the ocean for weeks at 12-18 knots (20-30 km/h). Suddenly when they hit land, they need to travel the last few dozen miles at ridiculous speeds?
I mean magnetic railgun tubes would be pretty awesome as the majority of CO2 produced in getting an item from China is the use of trucks at either end and the cargo ship is negligible.
But the problem is that trains are publicly owned, meaning that Elon “DOGE 420 BIG CHUNGUS WHOLESOME 100” Musk doesn’t get the credit (and the profit...) from them. Also, trains prove that “free market innovation” is really just a gigantic scam, and we can’t have that because then people might start investigating other political systems...
@@killgriffinnowHold up, free market innovation is still a thing, that’s what produced trains in the first place. In fact trains prove free market innovation works VERY well, because it (innovation) has created something (trains) which is very close to optimal for it’s function. This stupid hyperloop business only happens because idiot “visionaries” exist in any system and will continue to do so forever.
I love how there was an "Elon Musk is not involved" warning. As if the person who wrote the article knew everyone would think of Musk when they saw something as stupid as this.
I don't know how true that is. Many sleazy billionares love to use proxy companies to rid themselves of responsibility. Also "involved" is kind of a vague term. He could still be deeply involved and even if he isn't directly involved with design he could still hold them accountable to him if he doesn't like what they produce.
I think, for every person who's ever worked in marketing and/or logistics at least, this immediately slots into the "maybe they'll build it in the emirates"-dumb category.
In my hometown of Atlanta a recent referendum to expand our pathetic excuse of a metro failed. And everybody was so quick to dogpile on the "Well, they're racist" excuse, instead of thinking about it for 5 seconds. It was for 6 miles of track. For some reason, our metro is controlled by the county. Gwinnett county is *45 miles long*. The top half of Gwinnett county never goes to Atlanta except to go to the airport, they don't even consider themselves Atlantan. Oooooooooo it makes me so fucking mad. When the MARTA is convenient, it's fucking awesome. The problem is it's never convenient. What a waste.
The problem is that politicians and venture capitalists don't want to invest in boring yet proven solutions. Flashy bs like this is what parts investors from their money
"What if we took taxis and linked them together" Just build a fucking train "How about a synergized system of self driving pods that travel hun-" JUST BUILD....a fucking train
The funniest thing about all this is that nobody thought about the fact that all those containers in the shiny CGI came straight of a container ship. Such a ship usually takes about 4-6 weeks from China to Europe. Thank god at least the last 300 km are done at ultra high speed so one can save a couple of hours compared to a normal train :D
When I was younger I thought that despite looking so simple, these CGI futuristic concepts were thoroughly studied by scientists and accounted for every problem
@@graciliraptor3990 yeaaah but its not really in a science magazine, cuz it has nothing to do with science, it needs to portray itself as science. Just like new tesla factory in germany was shut down, because it had terrible OHS. It doesnt need to work well, the most important thing for them (elon or other middle aged kids with mental disorders) is to look futuristic
Try to erect just a single wind turbine somewhere remotely in Germany... takes "just a few years" to get the permissions. Now HHLA trying to build a HyperLoop trough at least half the country xD EDIT: HHLA just announced that they stopped research and development of the project.
Yepp, I laughed so hard when I first heard that HHLA wanted to build this crap. Then it was an even greater relief when I noticed that at least SOMEONE at HHLA had retained a smidge of realism and cancelled this crap. Phew, sanity does still exist.
@@RustyDust101 hhla also wanted to load containers on and off ships with drones a while back, wouldn’t be surprised if this came from the same department lmao
@@someone7826 true but those few atoms won’t behave like air anymore. And your train needs to be designed to function in a *tube*. Directing the air upwards will increase drag…
It's largely because in USA and Canada freight owns most the track so the hyper long trains are more of. Trend. It's cheaper but I do think Europe's model may be superior as it's indicative of one better fit to society.
The longest ever train was actually a cargo train going from China to Europe, it was a couple of km long. In general though cargo trains in Europe stay relatively short due to passenger trains gaining priority so the cargo trains need to be able to stop at sidings and start and stop fairly rapidly.
Speed is not generally a consideration in logistics, that’s why we still use ships so much. People want to be moved fast. Goods need to turn up on time, whenever that is
Yes but that's because the oceans are vast. Think about a single port having congestion because it's taking goods in faster then it can send them out. Let's say the majority of cargo leaves this port via 2 rail lines. The solution would be to either make the rail faster or build more rails. For the most part, building more rail is probably going to be your best bet, however, at some point you might have too many or because of local geography not be able to build more. In this case you would want faster rail.
@@Stickyrolls123 But the problem is not the trains, it that unloading a ship simply takes time. It makes no difference how fast the goods leave after they have left the ship
@@enider Nope, with slower trains you're absolutely going to throttle capacity. Conventionally this has been handled by building bigger harbors etc, but with the Hyperport, you could technically unload containers straight from the ship onto the pods, eliminating the need for storage.
German train trafic dispatcher speaking: Even on a conventional railline with conventional signaling, we are able to run up to 13 freight trains per direction and hour. And 40 containers per train is for German standards even a bit low. So the capacity of the line is even higher.
In French, we have that expression "branlette intellectuelle" which translates to "intellectual masturbation", hence the use of "futuristic sex-toys" is relevant! x)
The solar pannels on the tube are also a dumb idea, because to make the most efficient power in Germany your Pannels need to be at an 35° Angle Pointing south. Wrapping them around a tube makes them extremly inefficent. We germans hate that
"What were your goals on this project?" "We wanted it to be extremely convincing!" "So what would you say is Hyperport's greatest strength?" "Believability."
@@TheBoringEdward Insulted? Dude, it is a simple observation. Look at things like Stuttgart 21, the Elb-Philharmony and similar german major projects. They all are incredibly cost ineffizient, last for multiple decades, are products of enourmous government corruption and in the end fucked up at a crucial point. It is almost like major projects in germany are predestined to fail.
omg i died when I heard this was supposed to be built in Germany. That's the most proposterous thing I've heard in a while. In Germany you can't even build a single windmill without being sued by 5 civil initiatives. I don't think that company even believes they can do this. They probably just pitched this hoping some idiot dictator in dubai or some place like that will build it
Don't worry, they won't even reach the state of being sued. We are talking about Hamburg here. It is the same city that needed to build an operahouse on top of an already existing building. And don't get me wrong - I love my hometown and all, but honestly before they have built any of this even with chinese help the Elbe river will have chenged course from plate tectonics...
I'm also from Hamburg and our river (!) port has an even more general problem: They want to deepen the river to be able to host the increasingly larger cargo vessels wile the North Seas current will just wash the seafloor back in. Talk about the maintenance costs of being hellbent on staying relevant.
It is unbelievably easy to grift your way into german infrastructure projects. Just look at stuttgart 21, the new Altona station (the city of hamburg even got sued for corruption by the EU over that one), BER airport, autobahn maut and some of the other projects of our beloved minister of transportation.
I am happy to report the port of Antwerp has recently broken a record, of loading and unloading 23,500 containers in a single day by conventional means. If the hyperport can't do that, there's no use to even build it. Edit: by demand, and somehow... for clarity... I have changed 23.500 to 23,500. To be clear, here in Europe (Belgium in my case) it's a common practice to use a "." for thousands. At our uni, we use the point because it can mess up coding when you use the comma to splice conditions for a given function. Especially hard when you tell the computer to e.g. add 20, 352, 55, 884, 91 and 433, when you need to add 20,352, 55,884 and 91,433 (this is extremely oversimplified, just to give an exaample of why we do what we do...)
@@alex_3593 Correct. Germany has used the point for a long time now, while english speaking areas seem to prefer the comma. Don't know about other areas, but it's best to check first which they use. Yet to see one where they don't use both, though - seems that it's always one as the thousands marker and the other for decimals. On that note, make sure you use the correct scale for millions and up - German uses long scale for example, so a german Billion is in fact a trillion in english and vice versa. German journalists really seem to have issues with that, which makes for some funky economic news when the US once again blows several times the entire worlds money supply on something.
Easy solution to the pod breakdowns, create a mechanism whereby each individual pod can attach to the others so if one breaks down you can use the others to tow it. Then, attach all of them together all the time, add a single more efficient pod built for hauling the others at the front, put it on train tracks instead of the “hyper Uber ultra super mega track” and then just make a train because these loops are stupid
Whenever someone tries to innovate on transportation, it always leads back to either a bus, or a train. So just build better trains! Build faster trains! Build trains with better routes than we have now (more specifically in the United States).
Ikr mate, instead of trying to increase it's efficiency and iterating on its design, they are all just reinventing the wheel, and forcing their bullcrap down all of our throats by stating "this is the future of whatever"
It's almost like technological progress happens not through some very expensive gimmick, but through small changes and improvements to existing technology. The concept of trains may come from the 1800s, but the speed and efficiency of modern trains isn't even comparable.
Better and faster trains aren't needed, trains are great. What's needed is just good quality control and maintenance on rail, and maybe increase in rail capacity. A junk piece of shit train can go 160 km/h on a good piece of rail easily, and a high tech super automatic suspension Intercity Express is held up frequently by bad rail sections that cannot be safely traversed above 40km/h. Better rail signalling can allow you to run trains closer together too, so you don't have to have the train clear a 50km stretch of rail untill you can signal the next train behind it that it's clear to go. Sure it's all cost and effort, but if you can't put an infrastructure investment into something so cost effective, how can you think to afford anything fancier?
@@SianaGearz Where I live, the *slow* trains do 160km/h, and the "fast" trains do 225km/h. It is a quadruple track line, and the slow and fast lines both carry about 12 trains per hour.
It's taken a lot of work by a lot of people debunking his BS for years but the project of dispelling his techbro daddy illusion is finally taking hold.
@@dynamicworlds1 You are counting your cards to early as a backseat watcher relying on whats released to gain your perspective. The guy is the 2nd richest on the planet. I'm sure you really know what you are saying
@@TheFreshSpam tf are you even saying professionals in the field debunk these types of dumb ideas (including Elon's) all the time. Secondly, you can have dumb ideas and still be rich.
"Any new ideas for cargo transportation?" "High Speed Rail" "trains with larger cargo capacity" "A Train... in a tube.. that costs 10 times as much" *Employee of the month*
@Neeraj Poonia Any new ideas for cargo transportation?" "High Speed Rail" "trains with larger cargo capacity" "A Pod... in a tube.. that costs 10 times as much"
@@dogogamer212 What is the great need to change our existing transportation system. Everyone gets their stuff. There is no great need to drastically change it. Unless you want to con people out of money and have them purchase stock, etc. Like L.Ron musk.
@@davidsoom1551 well there is the problem of everything running on margin and thus being on the verge of collapse at all times. Like one boat getting stuck in a canal nearly tanked whole industries. Also trucking has been an exploitative inefficient garbage hole reliant on an ever more abused cadre of experienced drivers to keep it functioning. Said drivers are literally aging out and dying off and not being replaced because the industry is too abusive. Their solution of course is to be even more abusive. Also the entire process is as inefficient and costly as possible to taxpayers. We are literally footing the bill for a highly wasteful service for no reason. So yeah, an overhaul is inevitable at this point, lots of opportunity for innovation. Just not if your goal is to syphon off billions of dollars on pure, wasteful graft.
Retired truck driver. We had freight that couldn’t go through a mountainous area. Flagstaff was straight out. Packaging would burst in the thinner air. A vacuum leak would devastate freight.
@@shonefob You missed the part where I said "derailing". Just because it's as heavy and fast as a plane, that doesn't make them the same thing, by ANY stretch of the imagination. I'm not saying planes are bad. Planes are in control while in the air. These hyperloop pods are on the ground travelling through dense towns and cities. Should something go wrong and it breaks through the tube's wall, or "derails", you now have a massive object travelling at incredible speeds that is no longer in control. And all of this could happen in a city. When a plane crashes, the pilot still, typically, has some level of control. There's time between the realization that things have gone wrong and when that plane hits the ground. They can usually still direct the plane to a field or lake. They have the control to avoid people in most cases. These have none of that. Something goes wrong and everything nearby is subject to utter destruction because there's no time or ability to change trajectory.
If they're traveling 600mph at 1 minute apart from each other than the most minor motor weakness or any slow down will result in a catastrophic crash. You have to monitor every single one of these hundreds of pods to be in perfect condition evey time they move out.
My favorite part is that they made the pods super aerodynamic. Then planned to only run them through a vacuum tube. Where the is no air to be dynamic in.
@@unbanned6175 exactly and plus we can't ever have a true vacuum because ypu can YES get rid of air in a vacuum but it isn't a true vacuum because their are still air particals and irl in outer space it also isn't a true vacuum their is about 10 atoms per cubic centimeter in space while on earth's its like 10 billion trillion if I'm correct on that number that is so of course it costs more to make u less they are yes making something is a reduced vacuum with a lower atmosphere that's somewhat like a vacuum but I'm guessing that's what the streamlining is for? I mean do you understand how difficult and expensive it is to maintain a vacuum chamber? The biggest in the world is nasa having it but it's expensive and isn't cheap to maintain but it's only for science research, different planet atmosphere like conditions, and such-and-such so really wtf are they even doing do they know how much more space and money this will take and cost compared to the amazing trains we have are much cheaper costs and most of the crap Elon has made or proposed is dumb except for what he's doing with spacex and making space cheaper I'm a big fan on and happy for tho the stupid idea oh yea will have a million on Mars by 2050...um no that's not possible because this channel and another one subject zero talks about that the most realistic we could do is a measly 100,000 people by 2050.
The psychology behind these "inventors'"' obsession with private, individual, unconnected pod transport is simple and obvious: anything else would be like *sharing,* and the mere notion of doing anything remotely resembling that is unbearable. I've heard it said that Mr Musk, in particular, looks upon conventional public transport, with its unsegregated strangers sharing the same oxygen with each other, maybe even the possibility of actually being casually engaged by an unfamiliar person in friendly conversation, in absolute, unmitigated *horror.*
"Casually engaged by an unfamiliar person in friendly conversation" lmao, that's very idealistic of you The truth is that you'll find more loudmouths, crying babies, smelly sweaty herds, various offenders from thieves to more touchy-feely ones, and more.
There are these really great standardised Cargo Pods, they're called shipping containers. This in the video requires the Cargo Pods to be put inside of rounder Cargo Pods.
@@Nvgification These rounded pods aren't for Aerodynamics, since they're going to be travelling in a vacuum tube, there are no air molecules for it to have to deflect. A lack of air resistance renders aerodynamics redundant as the force it tries to mitigate is already 0. The pods here must be to protect the shipping container from being ripped open. Overall my point was, Shipping containers can already be mounted onto Cargo Ships, Freight Trains and Lorries. We already have styles of vehicles capable to transporting different amounts of shipping containers all the way from 100s of intercontinental bulk to 1 container getting delivered to a warehouse.
@@lucjanl1262 The issue with shipping containers is they aren't designed for being in a vacuum. If that is really an issue as it's only a downside if you build an expensive and ineffective cargo transport system.
I was just kinda disappointed they didn't show drones lifting the containers. I mean, if they are promoting this nonsense, they might as well go full retard.
Yeah, five Borth American-tier container trains per hour would blow any futuristic container cannon out of the water. Freight trains may be the one thing we did a good job of here
The best part of this channel, listening to a grumpy Czech engineer explain why the latest glitzy techno-fix is stupid and don't fix what isn't broken, damn it.
As someone who drives container trains for a living, after seeing this utter nonsense, I'm feeling incredibly smug. Go by train, you know it makes sense.
Thank you for your service. Back when I drove a truck I would go to the massive intermodal area just south of Chicago and always be so amazed at just how much material made it’s way in and out.
Here's another point: In the USA, when a train derails and blocks the route, the mess can be often be cleared from an adjacent road. How would you do that with a stuck pod in a sewer pipe? You do not.
@@dog209 more than likely teleortation (should it ever exist) will be so exorbitantly resource intensive that it will be entirely impractical for mass shipping and only useful for the richest customers willing to pay a few thousand dollars for same-hour delivery on their new iphone.
@@reaganharder1480 I don't think there's any particular reason to think it would cost a lot. It's more of a technical / feasibility issue than anything. Teleportation could just be straight up impossible though, so that sucks.
Well, it comes down to how the heck a teleporter would actually work. Off the top of my head, the two ideas that seem most likely (though still wrought with troublesome implications) are 1. Device A carefully scans every molecule in your body, then annihilates all those molecules and sends the data (and possibly energy from annihilation) to device B, which reconstructs said molecules from atoms made by converting energy. This has a few problems. First off, the amount of data required to accurately recreate every molecule in your body would be absolutely insane, and that's assuming it wouldn't kill you to operate this machine at a low enough precision to not run into problems with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. The computing hardware to handle that kind of data transmission would likely be pretty intense. Though, perhaps we're looking for teleportation that only is used for non-living things, like shoes or the like, so staying alive is less important. You've still got the incredible challenge of effectively building an object atom by atom if this method is to work. And we haven't even gotten to energy requirements yet. Assuming i've properly understood physics, the energy released by the initial annihilation of the item would be equal to the ever famous E=MC^2, in which E is the energy in Joules, M is the mass in Kg, and C is the speed of light in M/S. Based on this, a 1 Kg object would release around 9 TerraJoules of energy into device A, which for scale, is roughly 1/10th the energy released by the Fat Man bomb that leveled Nagasaki in WW2. Then device B would need the same amount of energy, plus whatever is lost due to system inefficiencies, to rebuild the item in question. Now you ask "why not just send all the energy from device A to device B?" which would probably be the best idea, but the logistics of actually transmitting that kind of power is... extreme. I'm no expert in the field of electrical engineering, but I am very doubtful an electrical system can be made to operate reasonably cheaply while being capable of transmitting nuclear detonation levels of power, and trying to do that wirelessly has even more problems. Option number 2. Device A creates artificial gravity (or antigravity) to warp space time so hard that it folds back onto itself and creates a wormhole. Now, spacetime is very confusing and i don't really understand it, so I can't say much about this, except that I'm pretty sure wormholes (if they are possible at all) require black hole levels of gravity, which has plenty of destructive implications for whatever is around it. All that to say, I am HIGHLY doubtful that teleportation will EVER exist. If we're lucky, we might manage some kind of hyperdrive that allows near-lightspeed space travel, though even that is mostly only hypotheticals based on weird space-timey stuff I don't actually understand.
I like your advocacy for rail. People might not find it sexy anymore and governments do their best to destroy it - because it is public service - but all things considered, it is for most cases, the best transportation system ever designed.
As a German I can tell you, even if this whole thing worked they would really have fun with the regulations especially in terms of safety you have here. Not to mention the law suits etc
Oh yes, the Germany safety regulations are byzantine and make any large scale infrastructure project almost impossible. See the Brandenburg Airport for a good example. This thing would never get out of the paper.
@@fresagrus4490 They aren't Byzantine. Your reference on that airport is correct, but the reason for the delay was the politic meddling as they changed large parts of the airport after building was already in progress and this caused cascades of problems.
Musk got them into this "startup doing a maglev in a near vacuum" which may not sit well with them now that they see what they are actually up against versus him chuckling and saying "it's simple, it's just like an air hockey table".
I’m convinced that the main reason Reddit tech dude bros are so in love with Musk-style technology “innovations” is because they are so isolated from the world that they genuinely don’t know what large-scale logistical technology already exists. The hyperloop sounds awesome only if you don’t already know how well trains work.
This works super well in Us where we dont really see trains that much and it can be easy to assume they arent that useful if you already arent well educated on transport
This is ‘bong’ science. It falls apart the moment the high wears off. We really have to discourage dropping huge sums on such projects just because we can.
German here: there is NO way they'll be even able to build this in Germany of all places. There are so many settlements & regulations which means tons and tons of money "wasted" on compensation for residents on/around the trackline even if it is underground. On top of that depending on where you are the soil is completely different/inconsistent. You'd have to measure it in the smallest increments wasting precious time/money again. On top of that those tunnel drillers are way too slow to even build the tunnels at the speed they had estimated previously (not sure if thats still up to date tho so don't quote me)
@@k-tech2937 That is not true! We can! We have even rebuild it completely once by the time we finish it! btw. the BER opened not long ago, in still the middle of Corona, and everyone was going "Yes, of course now". And btw.2 it's opened, but not really finished, but I guess they thought if nearly nobody flies, nobody will notice half of it not functioning properly.
The older I get, the more I understand the people who're obsessed with trains... Seriously, trains, trams, and buses could really make transport much more accessible
Yes but rich people don't care about such things as "public" transports or public anything for that matter. They want do be alone in their own golden towers, because regular people like us are perceived as cockroaches, we smell like piss and all that. Am I right?
Omg, you just solved the puzzle. Let's implement pods and blockchain and call it podchain. It will effectively be a train, but sexy and scientific because it has chain in the name.
The capacity is absolutely hilarious. I work at a railyard in a large country, we load over 168 containers double stacked on one outbound train, now this takes up to 4 engines linked to move but using this "hyper loop" system would cripple the entire country, food and good shortages would be rampant, not to mention straight tracks are near impossible considering our landscape. This stuff sounds cool and futuristic on paper but to anyone actually working in these industries they claim to be revolutionizing its hilariously stupid.
How long does it actually take to load one of those full trains? My only problem with this video was the math saying you could load a 40 container train in less than an hour which sounds way too fast
For this to ever be viable would require a leap in technology and available resources, as well as a basically peaceful world, otherwise we'll have the issue of terrorists having easy to fuck targets.
The problem I'm seeing is what happens if the cargo containers become misaligned in the pods? If this is supposed to be a near-vacuum system, that means there's little-to-no leeway in changes in dimensions. How do you get a container out once it's misaligned? What happens when if the doors don't close properly? This system seems to have absolutely no room for error and would require hundreds of additional specialists just to keep it running.
@@joeldykman7591 considering how frequently cargo bins in airliners become misaligned, or create an unbalanced loading, I'd be very surprised if a hyperloop didn't encounter this kind of issue often. That implies some kind of load balancing requirement (can't be end heavy either) for every container to meet a tolerance or be rejected.
I do like how their solution to "low energy, high efficiency" transport is a fucking monorail/maglev in a vacuum tube carrying single containers at a time.
It’s like they’re just incapable of imagining a train or its derivatives. Linking the pods together and putting them on regular tracks for higher capacity is just impossible to comprehend for wannabe futurists
@@MotorcycleWrites Someone needs to tattoo "Faster does not equal better or more efficient" on the backs of their hands or something because they're clearly incapable of imagining any improvement that isn't just making something fast.
What I don't get is, if they are lowering the pressure, why is it streamlined? The whole point of a vac-tube train is that you lower air-friction by putting the train in a low-pressure tunnel. You can use regular electric cargo trains, you don't need some special sealed pod thing, just a sealed cab for the engineer. Also, building your vac tubes above ground is stupid, then you have to incorporate expansion joints for thermal expansion. More complexity to try and seal to pull a vacuum.
@@MotorcycleWrites Small doge meme : "Myeah, but, mmmh-trains are mmmh-always toommcrowded and mmhstinky and you're mmhalways standing up !!! Mmmhpods are more comfortable and limited !!! MMMhI don't wanna compromise, and it's mmmhimpossible to improve trains right mmhnow !!!'
Why does the pod need to look so aerodynamic if it's travelling in a near vacuum? Reminds me of movies putting wings on starships that have no need to go into a planet's atmosphere.
@@commondognut A near vacuum environment has so few particles that they simply cannot provide any resistance to matter (that's the whole point of a vacuum). So trying to make an aerodynamic design for such an environment is just increasing drag.
"Much of the social history of the Western world over the past three decades has involved replacing what worked with what sounded good." - Thomas Sowell
I think this is only a partial vacuum, to reduce drag, but not entirely eliminate it. Makes the air pumps not have to be so expensive and less risk than a near total vacuum.
well actually our system of using 1 vehicle to move thousands of tons of cargo is why evergreen was a big problem with smaller transportation it's less likely to cause full supply chain paralysis. not misunderstand me this is still dumb af
No, the Evergreen problem is not an issue with the boats themselves, but an issue with having a narrow channel that can become blocked easily. Roads are generally immune to this as beyond some local blockages it is usually fairly easily to reroute around any blockage and keep most other traffic running while resolving the snarl. Trains are more vulnerable since they have fewer alternative paths, but in general it is still possible to reroute traffic. The hyperloop/hyperport is pretty much designed to completely fail at the slightest hesitation.
I love how well the younger folks (I'm 68, so that's a lot of folks) are covering BS. Miniminuteman (archeological conspiracies), Casual Geographic (animals and Nature) and you are some of my favorites. Excellent vids, funny AND I learn stuf. Thank you for your excellent content.
As a wise man said, "it's not one single revolutionary idea that will change the industry, but lots of small improvements", and that's why high-speed trains (TGV and Shinkansen) are successful
it's truly bizarre that people think this shit is revolutionary. there isn't some hard physical limitation that's preventing us from simply building faster trains. it's just that there's no reason to do so. the relevant economic pressures are selecting for dense, (relatively) slow rail networks over sparser high speed point-to-point lines.
@@user-lk2vo8fo2q Exactly, it's not a totally different technology like that will change everything, if we adopted trains for so long it's because they have a reliability record that has never been beaten, they can go fast, are relatively easy to build and cheaper than the hyperloop and other nonsense, they can transport a massive amount of passanger or marchandise and the whole installation is easier to maneuver than the hyperloop or a monorail for example (especially for track switches)
@@user-lk2vo8fo2q It really gets worse the more you think about it. If it's a port, it means the freight has been at sea most likely for months until then. It's low speed high efficiency freight. A standard freight train won't travel for a month, it'll only add a few days to the total travel. You want cost efficiency at that point, and one extra day isn't worth that much. Or at least, if you want to save time, the boats is where you should be looking for improvements. In fact, a 5% speed boost to boats will be 3 days for a 2 month travel. The only place where this would even remotely make sense would be for high speed freight, for example by plane. But planes don't transport containers and the freight isn't moved over huge distances after that, since you can just get the aircraft to fly at the closest airport. So again, the concept completely fails. It's absolutely the case of someone desperately looking for a problem to use their "solution".
@@ivanlagrossemoule the only aspect of their plan that has any potential at all is the thing about unloading the boat directly onto a train and then moving it to an inland warehouse for cheaper than you could already do that with trucks or rail. obviously their system won't actually be capable of doing that efficiently, but i could see the economic case for something which actually could.
Truly revolutionary stuff usually have inherent technological or methodological advantages that far outstrip the current system to the point that it is cost feasible to rip out the existing system to laid in the new one. Like how steam ships outstripped wind powered sailing ships and barges, or how locomotive trains outstripped animal driven transport on land. Until then, most practical improvements will always be on existing system until you reach technological saturation. Even today's high speed rail is not technically a true revolution; it uses existing rail technology put on steroids and its most expensive part is building new straighter, wider rails or to modify existing ones. Hyperloop is not the kind of revolutionary system to rip out existing rail system or good enough to spend so much money to build a dedicated infrastructure just for it.
@@karlmarx3705 Yeah, whatever bullshit fantasy you want to believe. There is already a working Maglev system in China, designed in Germany. Despite the brilliant engineering involved, its expensive af, that is why you don't see widespread implementation. Musk is a joker who invested in Tesla, kicked the founders out and is somehow a genius! Asshole would be closer to the truth, and the Boring Company is pure vapourware!
"and the process is as follows: take something that works, has a good economy of scale and is efficient etc, take it apart into small inefficient pieces, make the pieces look like futuristic sex toys and call them "pods" oh man, that cracked me up. Brilliant writing and delivery. I'm a fan.
That's genius. You shoot a single hole through some tube, and half of europe explodes. Imagine the emergency broadcasts. "The shockwave will reach the France hyperport in approximately sixteen minutes. Try to get as far from the tube as you can. Any cargo pods that contact the shockwave at any point of the track are expected to destroy all objects within a fifty meter radius.
There's a movie SAS: Rise of the Black Swan and in it they blow up a gas line between Britain and France. The entire thing just explodes and wreaks havoc. This is exactly how I'd imagine the disaster would go.
A vacuum isn't a nuclear warhead. The volume of space with no air compared to the surrounding atmosphere is basically negligible. A hole would do a lot of damage to the system itself as pressure inside renormalised, but it would be extremely localised. It would also be an implosion due to air rushing into the tube, not out, so collateral damage would be fairly minimal.
So y'all recon one of them pods meeting this pressure renormalization head on at full speed would be ok, eh? Even worse this kind of thing relies on its shape to withstand the pressure. If it gets a creased by something, it's gonna do a reenactment of that tanker truck implosion test video, and I wouldn't want to stand anywhere near any supports it might be connected to if that happens. Thing would look like one of those snakes that feign death in an overly dramatic fashion.
Yes, yes and more yes. As an engineer and tech enthusiast, I am really ticked off by people thinking that Musk is some sort of real world Tony Stark. He's a businessman (some of which are snake oil), not an innovator.
We cannot even build a new "Y" rail link between Hamburg, Bremen and Hannover without everyone complaining and a 50 years delay! So how should this work?
Eh, well I mean, this time it's a private project, and if it's ever tried, it would be so cool and new, and maybe also international, or even if just nationwide, news that it'll pass better and be faster, I'd say Not saying that it'd work better, if even that, but...
@@marcm8665 wouldn‘t happen if someone would consult people who know the nature from the start. Any species going extinct can kill an entire ecosystem. Moral of the story consider nature from the start and nobody needs to get annoyed by it :)
@@nicholasleclerc1583 Texas is attempting a private high speed rail system that is 100% private and they still run into problems with land acquisition and environmental issues. And that's Texas possibly the most friendly state to business.
I'm really surprised that a "normal" freight train in Europe is 40 containers per train. The ones I pass in the desert of the USA are easily 100 containers. I've only bothered to count them twice: 110 and 112, both in 2018.
Very frequent urban environments with a lot of railroad crossings, some as close as a few hundred meters don't allow long trains (passengers or freight) that could block cars and trucks traffic inside cities if the locomotive breaks down. Also the railroad traffic itself is almost always more intense in Europe and can be very easily perturbated. That's also why you can essentially find road trains in Australia, Canada and US due to the ultra sparse environment where they're circulating and the quasi non-existing presence of other vehicles on the roads they're using.
Here in the Benelux we have canals that connect little towns in the Ardennes with big harbours like Gent and Antwerp and if the water doesn’t work we still have trains for overland journeys
The maximum train length in Germany (and most other central european countries) is 740 m (~0.45 mil) on some routes up to 835 m, a standard electric locomotive for this job ist about 20 m long for this length you usually use 2, so 700 m of freight wagons. Sggrs wagons are 26.7 m long and can carry 2 * 40 ft or 4 * 20 ft containers. So one can fit up to 104 TEU or 52 FEU on one 740 m train. I don't know if the idea is still pursued but there was a discussion to raise the overhead wiring between Rotterdam and Duisburg so one could double-stack the containers almost doubling the train capacity. @chucku00 The limiting factor in length is because of the length of the stations and passing loops, not the level crossings. It doesn't really matter if you wait 2 or 3 minutes and especially on major railway lines and important road connections you won't find any level crossings anyway. Besides, locomotive breakdowns where the route is blocked for longer than a few minutes are pretty rare.
And that's not even taking into account trains in North America where the intermodal trains can have well over 200 containers per train since our trains are able to double stack the containers. So now with that same math at 7 trains per hour, that's 1400+ containers per hour, which ends up being 23.33+ containers per minute. Even with a 12 minute headway, that's still 16.66+ containers per minute.
But with such long trains, even a 12-minute headway would be optimistic. Those trains are slow and have very low acceleration and deceleration, so ideally you want them as far apart as possible, since otherwise even the slightest delay would cause disruption. With such long trains you’re looking at intervals of 20 minutes at best, but more likely 30 minutes. That’s still 400 containers per hour (6.666… per minute), which is still even better than Adam’s estimates, but not quite at the level you’re suggesting.
@@KasabianFan44 I'm not saying you're wrong persay, I'm saying it varies by rail line and it does. You aren't going to measure rail traffic density in Elkhart, Indiana, then apply that density to a place like Needles, California, or Altoona, Pennsylvania. Every part of the US rail line is different in one way or another. Places like Tehachapi, California is going to have far less dense rail traffic cause trains there are restricted to no more than around 23MPH and much of the line is single track. On the other hand, Barstow, California is going to be far more dense, as it is a major artery that receives eastbound trains from the Ports of LA and Long Beach, as well as other commodities from Bakersfield, California. Not to mention westbound traffic heading into Barstow from Arizona, Nevada and elsewhere. And that's on top of the fact that two railroads, both BNSF and Union Pacific flow through there. But of course, not all lines are that dense.
when you showed that quote about a linear supply chain being dangerous, first thing i thought about was: yeah, there was that boat that got stuck in a canal some time back...
@@n0body550 Besides, yes better techs were invented, and it is possible to replace a conventional method with a new invention. But nothing of these tech transitions happened overnight or with a single truly revolutionary Elon Musk-esque invention. They happened in iterations, sometimes taking up decades. Even in their domain of digital technology, taking the smartphone as an example, iPhone didn't really "revolutionize" the industry. The concept had existed years before they made it, it was their execution that got everything right. The whole smartphone as a concept was nothing new at the time. So if anyone pitches a totally new tech that is better in every way than the conventional tech, and promises to revolutionize the industry in one single invention, it's probably BS.
@@paulaldo9413 not really bs if someone has a single invention to revolutionise something, theres plenty of inventions in history that have revolutionised things its just how wary and pessimistic people can be to prevent it happening, i agree its unlikely but not bs
As ships crew. I say yes! Please make this take 2 weeks. I want to enjoy each port town. Right now container ships unload to fast to be able to enjoy the towns.
Of course this is ridiculous, what we need are hyper canals large enough for container ships. These canals would allow the container ships to deliver the shipping containers direct to retailers, avoiding the port bottlenecks, we can build these canals along any and all existing infrastructure. Simply install draw bridges at all intersections (only slightly increasing travel times) for land based vehicles, and then we could build locks to navigate mountainous terrain.
@⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻ u can pull 2 or 3 containers with an truck...thank the manufacturers using big engines so they only rev to 3.5000rpm
@⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻ here is the engine size thing Biggest engine in an mass production car 2013/14 dodge viper 8.4 liters Average truck engine size 14 to 16.5 liters
I am adding the prefix Hyper- and X- and Quantum- to all my math papers & theorems. That signifies I am a supergenius who will save the world & everybody should give me billions of dollars.
If ever in life I have any sort of issue, because of this channel my first thought will always be "Can I fix it with a train?" Need to be somewhere? Train? Not enough money? Train? Weak musculature? Train? Chose a wife that is too annoying? Train?
"If a freight rail line is clogged, we can just reroute around the wreck." North American railroads abandoning parallel routes: "Are you sure about that?"
Actually, North American rail systems still have a lot of parallel capacity. The major transcontinental rail lines are often replicated by other lines that travel through different parts of the country, and all that would be needed to bypass a major derailment or sabotaged facility would be to run trains on those parallel lines, then use interconnecting lines to get to the desired destination.
The plan is to build it in Europe, where population density is a lot higher than in the US, and railroads are actually seen as a major mode of transportation, so rerouting is not that difficult.
Why would anyone go through all this effort to deliver a container from a seaport to an inland logistic center much faster? Let me reiterate, FROM A SEAPORT. That container has been on a ship possibly for weeks and there is a company that wants to cut down a day-long train trip at the end of its journey to a few hours. So after all of this investment, we lower the total delivery time of a container across the ocean from three weeks to... basically three weeks. After establishing that speed is a major selling point this is the patient's missing head. If we want something delivered fast across oceans then it was most likely already on an airplane. If a container is waiting in a port it's a safe bet speed wasn't an issue. So for me, the biggest problem here is that this is a solution for a non-existing problem. even every other point they had doesn't work, like reducing emissions. most rail lines in western Europe are already electrified. we just need to use exclusively electric trains and not use trucks for trips to destinations far away from the port.
I managed a container terminal for 10 years, the delicate pods would be wrecked in no time by crane drivers on bonus. A ship like the Ever Given costs up to a million dollars a day whilst not moving containers about.
"So for me, the biggest problem here is that this is a solution for a non-existing problem." Well, not quite. The problem still does exist - it would be nice to move things from sea ports to inland ports and other places much more quickly. Just there are too many costs and impracticalities about this proposal for it to be a workable solution to that problem (which does exist).
@@pikachulovesketchup666 If you dont care about the timing of the failure, you can just sit back and enjoy as heat cycles and rain do their thing until eventually one tiny little rupture shows up anywhere in the 500km tube
Honestly the last point with sabotage reads like a Bosnian Ape Society video. Where the Hyperport will easily be prone to Russian infestation, in a similar manner to a house having a termite infestation. Like you open up a pod, and see a bunch of Spetsnaz agents in it.
I find it ironic that the caption "Welcome to a new era of reliability" (at 1:35) comes up while showing a truck that uses two disconnected power units instead of just one.
So much this. A big part of logistics is planning. They slow down ships on purpose to safe on fuel costs. They can afford to do this because they planned their supply lines months in advance. Those few minutes saved in the end is not going to matter at all lol.
Even if we had a proper evolution of transportation it'll take a cataclysm to get the people in charge to give up paved roads or any other infrastructure well set in place.
They were delighted to be the first group riding the new Hyper vacuum Loop. There was a fault, which caused a quick halt, it took forever to scoop out the goop.
In Germany we have been busy debating about the infrastructure to deliver electricity from the North to the South for more than four years, with the citizens of basically every second town along the way launching a campaign against having one or two electrical poles build in their vague facinity and demanding compensation. By now there are serious considerations about running the lines underground, which would be far more expensive... And that's with electrical poles and wires that can be routed at a 45° angle when needed and are, compared to such a project, basically invisible. So... No way they would get from Hamburg to Frankfurt, Köln or wherever they were planning to go.
@@josifstalin4372 No they are wrong. The electro magnetic field caused by high voltage electric cables is on the ground only a fraction of the earth's elctro magnetic field.
@@capitaen_proton9480 problem is statistics said that the cancer rate was 10 times higher in these apartments close to high voltage cables than normal.
@@josifstalin4372 correlation isn't connection. There are so many factors that can increase cancer rates and a lot of them were used in buildings for years.
@@josifstalin4372 could also be that there were some materials used in the building that caused the cancer. at least that sounds more likely to me than the cancer beeing caused by the cables
I’m a truck driver and trust me when I tell you that these transportation and logistics companies are more than willing to sacrifice safety and everything else for speed.
While I believe you, they are businesses. Outside of the US, in developed nations anyway (ignore the Emirates please), this won't be implemented on any real level, the numbers cause it to be cut very quickly. And considering the cost to get even one line of this going in Europe of all places (as the video covers, they have to buy so much land since it needs a straight line), it's dead in the water already, most likely.
@@MindForgedManacle Buying land is a moot point, as is the straight line bit. Has to be built subterranean, only realistic way to do it. Also possible to "chamber" large sections so they aren't subject to any more than expected minor parasitic loss of vacuum, then it's just much much smaller "vacuumlocks" that have to be depressurized each time a carriage passes through. That aside, it's still a looooooong way from financially viable.
@@masondegaulle5731 Property rights in many countries are generally understood to extend all the way down to the center of the Earth. People have been successfully sued for oil drilling hundreds of meters below other people's property. Not to mention that where there's land with buildings, there's infrastructure. Even if you're building underground and avoid the legal clusterfuck, there's still foundations and sewage and power lines to deal with.
@@Karak-_- Because every piece of land is owned by someone and unlike the US the pieces are pretty small. So you have to buy a lot of them from various owners who often dont want to sell. The next problem are the neighbours. If you want to build something, the neighbours can raise an objection, which will atleast cost you a lot of time before you can start construction (again you have a lot of neighbours and some will for sure have a problem). Even governmental projects sometimes struggle with those problems.
“trains are to engineering as crabs are to biology. on a long enough timescale, if you optimize almost any system enough, you eventually get some form of either a train or a crab”
What’s this a quote from?
69thlkr
Crab train
Train crab
Optimize even more and you get the CrabTrain 0.o
Everyone was perfectly happy for these containers to travel the ocean for weeks at 12-18 knots (20-30 km/h). Suddenly when they hit land, they need to travel the last few dozen miles at ridiculous speeds?
I mean magnetic railgun tubes would be pretty awesome as the majority of CO2 produced in getting an item from China is the use of trucks at either end and the cargo ship is negligible.
That being said it’s the electric power that is the selling point not the speed so you are correct
I’m not a rocket scientist but I’m pretty sure fastest things aren’t usually the most efficient
@@James-sk4db If that electric power is generated with clean energy such as nuclear or hydropower, then it could have some actual appeal to it.
Not ridiculous speed... LUDICRIOUS speed
Moral of this whole channel: Just. Build. A. Train
Words to live by 😌
:D and kind of true
But the problem is that trains are publicly owned, meaning that Elon “DOGE 420 BIG CHUNGUS WHOLESOME 100” Musk doesn’t get the credit (and the profit...) from them. Also, trains prove that “free market innovation” is really just a gigantic scam, and we can’t have that because then people might start investigating other political systems...
bUt iT iS aN OuTdAtEd TeChNoLoGy fRoM 1800!!1!!1!1!1!1!!
@@killgriffinnowHold up, free market innovation is still a thing, that’s what produced trains in the first place. In fact trains prove free market innovation works VERY well, because it (innovation) has created something (trains) which is very close to optimal for it’s function. This stupid hyperloop business only happens because idiot “visionaries” exist in any system and will continue to do so forever.
I love how there was an "Elon Musk is not involved" warning. As if the person who wrote the article knew everyone would think of Musk when they saw something as stupid as this.
Didn't need to bother, we still think it's stupid.
I don't know how true that is. Many sleazy billionares love to use proxy companies to rid themselves of responsibility.
Also "involved" is kind of a vague term. He could still be deeply involved and even if he isn't directly involved with design he could still hold them accountable to him if he doesn't like what they produce.
he thought up the legendary hyperloop so the hyperloop but freight is going to ring a bell isnt it
That’s exactly what I thought this was going to be. Elon is the poster child for this crap.
Elno wrote the “whitepaper” on this particular “invention”, and also calls his Teslas-in-tunnels scheme “loop” as well.
I think, for every person who's ever worked in marketing and/or logistics at least, this immediately slots into the "maybe they'll build it in the emirates"-dumb category.
Lol exactly. Every stupid idea ends up in the UAE
Maybe they can haul their sewage in something like this? Those trucks aren’t nearly as cool as this concept.
@@MindForgedManacle they in creative mode over there
@@briangarrow448 now THAT's an idea, worthy of Sheik Mohammed's full attention (and a poem on a silver plaque, obv)
@@veronikavartanova4044 I wonder what the word for “hubris” is in Arabic?
I like trains. I want trains. Why can't we just do world class, convenient, accountable to people trains?
In my hometown of Atlanta a recent referendum to expand our pathetic excuse of a metro failed. And everybody was so quick to dogpile on the "Well, they're racist" excuse, instead of thinking about it for 5 seconds. It was for 6 miles of track. For some reason, our metro is controlled by the county. Gwinnett county is *45 miles long*. The top half of Gwinnett county never goes to Atlanta except to go to the airport, they don't even consider themselves Atlantan.
Oooooooooo it makes me so fucking mad. When the MARTA is convenient, it's fucking awesome. The problem is it's never convenient. What a waste.
Train good
Make them run on time first.
One thing at a time. (Maybe a country specific british comment)
The problem is that politicians and venture capitalists don't want to invest in boring yet proven solutions. Flashy bs like this is what parts investors from their money
How much money are YOU willing to pay for it?
The “why not just build a train” line with various lush effects on it is maybe the best running gag of all time honestly
The lush effect was the Windows 98 logon sound. Who recognised it?
Or a bullet train if you want it fast. Japan is already there.
Trains are lame.
Society has already already made up its mind that trains are thing of the past.
@@Novusod Are you a MILLENNIAL?
@@teebosaurusyou I am from Gen-X.
Fun fact: PODS is an acronym for "Pieces of Dumb Shit", which is why tech grifters always call them that.
This is literally lesson 1 in Engineering 101: start with a problem, not a solution
Plus, we all know the solution should either be ever increasing levels of WD40 and duct tape
What's lesson 2?
Obviously the problem is not having cool pods zooming around
@ civota mu az lesson 2 is “if it moves and it shouldn’t, duct tape”
@@modern5387 lesson 3 if it should move but doesn't, WD-40
Took me 25 years to find this channel and realize that growing up the strange kids who were obsessed with trains had it right all along
As one of those kids, I can tell you that we probably would have been obsessed with them even if they weren't the paragon of efficient transportation.
@@deathhog But they are the paragon of efficient transportation. AND they're really cool. You know. We all know. :D
Based avtism
How do trains deal with the radiation, micrometeorites and massive sandstorms on Mars though?
@@bergenbergenbergenbergen3512 but we are on earth though
And on this episode of "Just build a fucking train" Adam Something doesn't have to deal with Elon Musk for once
Only with the consequences of the same stupid approach to things.
They could literally build a Container version of a TGV High Speed Train. It would be cheaper and could be added to existing lines.
"What if we took taxis and linked them together" Just build a fucking train
"How about a synergized system of self driving pods that travel hun-" JUST BUILD....a fucking train
These ports already HAVE trains. If there's a system that can replace or augment them this ain't it.
Don't listen to this Adam guy. I have sources saying that he is payed off by Big Track companies
The funniest thing about all this is that nobody thought about the fact that all those containers in the shiny CGI came straight of a container ship. Such a ship usually takes about 4-6 weeks from China to Europe. Thank god at least the last 300 km are done at ultra high speed so one can save a couple of hours compared to a normal train :D
tbh we can probably convince "innovator" companies to build trains by calling them Pod Giga-Chains instead...
Behold, the UltraPod! The pods can link together for greater synergies!
@@anthonythompson6053 And get this they run on Electricity and Magnetic resonance
Or they could market chains as HyperRope
@@pappadam2818 I'm blowing HyperRopes over this idea
@@asandax6very cool way of saying how bullet train works, this might work
When I was younger I thought that despite looking so simple, these CGI futuristic concepts were thoroughly studied by scientists and accounted for every problem
Then when you're older you realise they're just dumb ideas from the idiot with the most money and the loudest voice.
If they were, they wouldnt be there
@@erneststyczen7071 true, if they were so good and practical they wouldn't be stuck as just some science magazine fodder forever lol
@@graciliraptor3990 yeaaah but its not really in a science magazine, cuz it has nothing to do with science, it needs to portray itself as science. Just like new tesla factory in germany was shut down, because it had terrible OHS. It doesnt need to work well, the most important thing for them (elon or other middle aged kids with mental disorders) is to look futuristic
@@Chris-ft2yx it will almost never crash if it's run well
Try to erect just a single wind turbine somewhere remotely in Germany... takes "just a few years" to get the permissions.
Now HHLA trying to build a HyperLoop trough at least half the country xD
EDIT: HHLA just announced that they stopped research and development of the project.
xDD naja passt wohl haha
List of everyone who is surprised by that:
1.
They watched the video 🤣🤣🤣
Yepp, I laughed so hard when I first heard that HHLA wanted to build this crap. Then it was an even greater relief when I noticed that at least SOMEONE at HHLA had retained a smidge of realism and cancelled this crap. Phew, sanity does still exist.
@@RustyDust101 hhla also wanted to load containers on and off ships with drones a while back, wouldn’t be surprised if this came from the same department lmao
When the CGI for your vacuum train has "aerodynamic" pods in it, i'm already laughing at you right there.
lmao good take
There won't be a perfect vacuum.
@@someone7826 true but those few atoms won’t behave like air anymore. And your train needs to be designed to function in a *tube*. Directing the air upwards will increase drag…
@@andreewert6576 people just overhype everything and then forget about it 4 months later
I can't believe I didn't even notice that, JFC
40 containers per train? We call that in the US “weak shit”
America: Where Infinity Train isn't just a cartoon show.
US freight operators: Safety Fifth
Most of the US would ask what a train is
It's largely because in USA and Canada freight owns most the track so the hyper long trains are more of. Trend. It's cheaper but I do think Europe's model may be superior as it's indicative of one better fit to society.
The longest ever train was actually a cargo train going from China to Europe, it was a couple of km long.
In general though cargo trains in Europe stay relatively short due to passenger trains gaining priority so the cargo trains need to be able to stop at sidings and start and stop fairly rapidly.
Speed is not generally a consideration in logistics, that’s why we still use ships so much. People want to be moved fast. Goods need to turn up on time, whenever that is
Yes but that's because the oceans are vast. Think about a single port having congestion because it's taking goods in faster then it can send them out. Let's say the majority of cargo leaves this port via 2 rail lines. The solution would be to either make the rail faster or build more rails. For the most part, building more rail is probably going to be your best bet, however, at some point you might have too many or because of local geography not be able to build more. In this case you would want faster rail.
@@Stickyrolls123 But the problem is not the trains, it that unloading a ship simply takes time. It makes no difference how fast the goods leave after they have left the ship
bruh that cool and all for containers that come first but the ones in the back have to wait *WAY* longer
@@enider Nope, with slower trains you're absolutely going to throttle capacity. Conventionally this has been handled by building bigger harbors etc, but with the Hyperport, you could technically unload containers straight from the ship onto the pods, eliminating the need for storage.
@@VVayVVard no you couldn't. covered in the video.
German train trafic dispatcher speaking: Even on a conventional railline with conventional signaling, we are able to run up to 13 freight trains per direction and hour. And 40 containers per train is for German standards even a bit low. So the capacity of the line is even higher.
“Make the pieces look like futuristic sex toys, and start calling them pods” 🤣🤣🤣🤣
why, it worked for iDevices
Mhhh phalic objects make me feel powerful
Lost my shit at that point 😂
Sex pods.
In French, we have that expression "branlette intellectuelle" which translates to "intellectual masturbation", hence the use of "futuristic sex-toys" is relevant! x)
This video is the living manifestation of the phrase, “We have flying cars, they are called helicopters”.
We don't
@@Towzlie tf wdym we clearly have helicopters
That dude in Australia that converted a helicopter to a drone bike had the best idea for flying cars
There is A Reason There Called Cars And Not Helicopters 🙄
Giv De People Wat De Want😋
ua-cam.com/video/GQMGq8gk6QM/v-deo.html
Bikes exist, some variations of cars too, but they are more like drones
The solar pannels on the tube are also a dumb idea, because to make the most efficient power in Germany your Pannels need to be at an 35° Angle Pointing south.
Wrapping them around a tube makes them extremly inefficent.
We germans hate that
as you should
A German soldier not on meth is inefficient. Doesn't mean you give every soldier meth... or does it?
@@ansonburgdorf3940 warte mal, soll man nicht?
@@davidreuters8509 otherwise the soldiers would be riding kids bicycles into battle
@@ansonburgdorf3940 Ever heard of "Panzerschokolade"?
"What were your goals on this project?"
"We wanted it to be extremely convincing!"
"So what would you say is Hyperport's greatest strength?"
"Believability."
as believable as stuttgart21 ?
@@cirno9356 "As believable as our next project: HyperBridge!
@@jaysefgames1155 what's that?
@@cirno9356 “as believable as our ice cold minus k ice maker!”
If believability was the goal, then they failed.
"....to be build in Germany"
this project is already dead
SEKAI ICHIII!!
rule 1 in europe: straight lines dont exist
You just insulted the entirety of my race!
But yes.
@@TheBoringEdward Insulted? Dude, it is a simple observation. Look at things like Stuttgart 21, the Elb-Philharmony and similar german major projects. They all are incredibly cost ineffizient, last for multiple decades, are products of enourmous government corruption and in the end fucked up at a crucial point. It is almost like major projects in germany are predestined to fail.
@@links-gut-versifftergrunme1809 Yes. I agree. I was being ironic.
omg i died when I heard this was supposed to be built in Germany. That's the most proposterous thing I've heard in a while. In Germany you can't even build a single windmill without being sued by 5 civil initiatives. I don't think that company even believes they can do this. They probably just pitched this hoping some idiot dictator in dubai or some place like that will build it
Don't worry, they won't even reach the state of being sued. We are talking about Hamburg here. It is the same city that needed to build an operahouse on top of an already existing building.
And don't get me wrong - I love my hometown and all, but honestly before they have built any of this even with chinese help the Elbe river will have chenged course from plate tectonics...
I'm also from Hamburg and our river (!) port has an even more general problem: They want to deepen the river to be able to host the increasingly larger cargo vessels wile the North Seas current will just wash the seafloor back in. Talk about the maintenance costs of being hellbent on staying relevant.
It is unbelievably easy to grift your way into german infrastructure projects. Just look at stuttgart 21, the new Altona station (the city of hamburg even got sued for corruption by the EU over that one), BER airport, autobahn maut and some of the other projects of our beloved minister of transportation.
I am happy to report the port of Antwerp has recently broken a record, of loading and unloading 23,500 containers in a single day by conventional means. If the hyperport can't do that, there's no use to even build it.
Edit: by demand, and somehow... for clarity... I have changed 23.500 to 23,500. To be clear, here in Europe (Belgium in my case) it's a common practice to use a "." for thousands. At our uni, we use the point because it can mess up coding when you use the comma to splice conditions for a given function. Especially hard when you tell the computer to e.g. add 20, 352, 55, 884, 91 and 433, when you need to add 20,352, 55,884 and 91,433 (this is extremely oversimplified, just to give an exaample of why we do what we do...)
That would take this Hyperport nonsense *16 days* to move.
Still not used to seeing . as the thousands marker...
@@DxBlack yea thought it was decimal at first
@@springyard20xx42 Different countries use different ones I guess
@@alex_3593 Correct. Germany has used the point for a long time now, while english speaking areas seem to prefer the comma. Don't know about other areas, but it's best to check first which they use. Yet to see one where they don't use both, though - seems that it's always one as the thousands marker and the other for decimals.
On that note, make sure you use the correct scale for millions and up - German uses long scale for example, so a german Billion is in fact a trillion in english and vice versa. German journalists really seem to have issues with that, which makes for some funky economic news when the US once again blows several times the entire worlds money supply on something.
Easy solution to the pod breakdowns, create a mechanism whereby each individual pod can attach to the others so if one breaks down you can use the others to tow it. Then, attach all of them together all the time, add a single more efficient pod built for hauling the others at the front, put it on train tracks instead of the “hyper Uber ultra super mega track” and then just make a train because these loops are stupid
They could still call it a “hyper Uber ultra super mega track” and no-one would be the wiser...
@@Korschtal ye just increase the track gauge by 1 nanometer
What if i paint a train silver and black, stick a "takes bitcoin" sign on it ?
@@blakksheep736 Loopcoin 🤣 personally I hope it takes Chuck E. Cheese tokens
@@YourCapyFrenBigly_3DPipes1999 at least you can exchange those tokens for something you can eat.
Whenever someone tries to innovate on transportation, it always leads back to either a bus, or a train. So just build better trains! Build faster trains! Build trains with better routes than we have now (more specifically in the United States).
Ikr mate, instead of trying to increase it's efficiency and iterating on its design, they are all just reinventing the wheel, and forcing their bullcrap down all of our throats by stating "this is the future of whatever"
It's almost like technological progress happens not through some very expensive gimmick, but through small changes and improvements to existing technology. The concept of trains may come from the 1800s, but the speed and efficiency of modern trains isn't even comparable.
Better and faster trains aren't needed, trains are great. What's needed is just good quality control and maintenance on rail, and maybe increase in rail capacity. A junk piece of shit train can go 160 km/h on a good piece of rail easily, and a high tech super automatic suspension Intercity Express is held up frequently by bad rail sections that cannot be safely traversed above 40km/h. Better rail signalling can allow you to run trains closer together too, so you don't have to have the train clear a 50km stretch of rail untill you can signal the next train behind it that it's clear to go.
Sure it's all cost and effort, but if you can't put an infrastructure investment into something so cost effective, how can you think to afford anything fancier?
@@SianaGearz Where I live, the *slow* trains do 160km/h, and the "fast" trains do 225km/h. It is a quadruple track line, and the slow and fast lines both carry about 12 trains per hour.
The United States is way too big to have a system like Japan where every major cities are much closer than all of USA's biggest cities.
I love that “Not made by Elon” is kind of a selling point now.
His reputation is likely tanking among people who know their stuff.
@@shade9592 and i guess that Europe doesn’t like Elon that much.
It's taken a lot of work by a lot of people debunking his BS for years but the project of dispelling his techbro daddy illusion is finally taking hold.
@@dynamicworlds1 You are counting your cards to early as a backseat watcher relying on whats released to gain your perspective.
The guy is the 2nd richest on the planet. I'm sure you really know what you are saying
@@TheFreshSpam tf are you even saying
professionals in the field debunk these types of dumb ideas (including Elon's) all the time.
Secondly, you can have dumb ideas and still be rich.
"Any new ideas for cargo transportation?"
"High Speed Rail"
"trains with larger cargo capacity"
"A Train... in a tube.. that costs 10 times as much"
*Employee of the month*
@Neeraj Poonia Any new ideas for cargo transportation?"
"High Speed Rail"
"trains with larger cargo capacity"
"A Pod... in a tube.. that costs 10 times as much"
A pod*
@@dogogamer212 What is the great need to change our existing transportation system. Everyone gets their stuff. There is no great need to drastically change it. Unless you want to con people out of money and have them purchase stock, etc. Like L.Ron musk.
Make that 1000x the cost. At least!
@@davidsoom1551 well there is the problem of everything running on margin and thus being on the verge of collapse at all times. Like one boat getting stuck in a canal nearly tanked whole industries.
Also trucking has been an exploitative inefficient garbage hole reliant on an ever more abused cadre of experienced drivers to keep it functioning. Said drivers are literally aging out and dying off and not being replaced because the industry is too abusive. Their solution of course is to be even more abusive.
Also the entire process is as inefficient and costly as possible to taxpayers. We are literally footing the bill for a highly wasteful service for no reason.
So yeah, an overhaul is inevitable at this point, lots of opportunity for innovation. Just not if your goal is to syphon off billions of dollars on pure, wasteful graft.
Retired truck driver. We had freight that couldn’t go through a mountainous area. Flagstaff was straight out. Packaging would burst in the thinner air. A vacuum leak would devastate freight.
There's a HyperPort now? What's next? Hyper Lift? A space Elevator in a Vacuum tube?
Dont give them any ideas...
Hyperfleshlight
Hyper mail service. Send emails by pod!
@@daruween1398 that's just sounds like a vacuum cleaner
Yeah. The hyperlift fills the column with water so the pod floats up the required floor
Imagine one of these things "derailing". A multi ton bullet travelling at airplane speeds sailing into buildings
Quick make that into an hour and a half long movie
So...a plane? A multi ton bullet traveling at airplane speeds is a plane. And we are fine with those flying overhead.
@@shonefob Flying's cool so yes
@@shonefob You missed the part where I said "derailing". Just because it's as heavy and fast as a plane, that doesn't make them the same thing, by ANY stretch of the imagination. I'm not saying planes are bad. Planes are in control while in the air. These hyperloop pods are on the ground travelling through dense towns and cities. Should something go wrong and it breaks through the tube's wall, or "derails", you now have a massive object travelling at incredible speeds that is no longer in control. And all of this could happen in a city. When a plane crashes, the pilot still, typically, has some level of control. There's time between the realization that things have gone wrong and when that plane hits the ground. They can usually still direct the plane to a field or lake. They have the control to avoid people in most cases. These have none of that. Something goes wrong and everything nearby is subject to utter destruction because there's no time or ability to change trajectory.
If they're traveling 600mph at 1 minute apart from each other than the most minor motor weakness or any slow down will result in a catastrophic crash. You have to monitor every single one of these hundreds of pods to be in perfect condition evey time they move out.
My favorite part is that they made the pods super aerodynamic. Then planned to only run them through a vacuum tube. Where the is no air to be dynamic in.
man u made me laugh so hard
Well it's probably so if there are leaks and the fact it won't be a perfect vacuum, if you hit a pocket of air without aerodynamics, you're fucked.
but they're already fucked regardless of shape
HAHAHAH YES YES YES GOOD POINT YOUR MY FAVORITE NOW LMAO
@@unbanned6175 exactly and plus we can't ever have a true vacuum because ypu can YES get rid of air in a vacuum but it isn't a true vacuum because their are still air particals and irl in outer space it also isn't a true vacuum their is about 10 atoms per cubic centimeter in space while on earth's its like 10 billion trillion if I'm correct on that number that is so of course it costs more to make u less they are yes making something is a reduced vacuum with a lower atmosphere that's somewhat like a vacuum but I'm guessing that's what the streamlining is for? I mean do you understand how difficult and expensive it is to maintain a vacuum chamber? The biggest in the world is nasa having it but it's expensive and isn't cheap to maintain but it's only for science research, different planet atmosphere like conditions, and such-and-such so really wtf are they even doing do they know how much more space and money this will take and cost compared to the amazing trains we have are much cheaper costs and most of the crap Elon has made or proposed is dumb except for what he's doing with spacex and making space cheaper I'm a big fan on and happy for tho the stupid idea oh yea will have a million on Mars by 2050...um no that's not possible because this channel and another one subject zero talks about that the most realistic we could do is a measly 100,000 people by 2050.
The psychology behind these "inventors'"' obsession with private, individual, unconnected pod transport is simple and obvious: anything else would be like *sharing,* and the mere notion of doing anything remotely resembling that is unbearable. I've heard it said that Mr Musk, in particular, looks upon conventional public transport, with its unsegregated strangers sharing the same oxygen with each other, maybe even the possibility of actually being casually engaged by an unfamiliar person in friendly conversation, in absolute, unmitigated *horror.*
One of few areas I generally agree with him, I am not a technobro, I just hate being around any more than few people at the time.
@@michalsoukup1021 I would read that a bit more carefully
"Casually engaged by an unfamiliar person in friendly conversation" lmao, that's very idealistic of you
The truth is that you'll find more loudmouths, crying babies, smelly sweaty herds, various offenders from thieves to more touchy-feely ones, and more.
There are these really great standardised Cargo Pods, they're called shipping containers. This in the video requires the Cargo Pods to be put inside of rounder Cargo Pods.
Aerodynamics?
@@Nvgification These rounded pods aren't for Aerodynamics, since they're going to be travelling in a vacuum tube, there are no air molecules for it to have to deflect. A lack of air resistance renders aerodynamics redundant as the force it tries to mitigate is already 0. The pods here must be to protect the shipping container from being ripped open.
Overall my point was, Shipping containers can already be mounted onto Cargo Ships, Freight Trains and Lorries. We already have styles of vehicles capable to transporting different amounts of shipping containers all the way from 100s of intercontinental bulk to 1 container getting delivered to a warehouse.
Tbh if you transport something in vacuum rounder shape is usually safer than more cube-y ones, like shipping containers
@@lucjanl1262 The issue with shipping containers is they aren't designed for being in a vacuum. If that is really an issue as it's only a downside if you build an expensive and ineffective cargo transport system.
@@Randomturtle001 well, true, I can't argue with you
I mean pretty CGI is pretty damn telling...
Hello darkness my friend
I was just kinda disappointed they didn't show drones lifting the containers. I mean, if they are promoting this nonsense, they might as well go full retard.
Renderite is the best construction material, it always looks sleek and doesn't need to obey those pesky laws of physics
Tells you where the money went.
@@Soken50 It's a bitch to order though. Nobody seems to have any to actually buy and build with!
Keep in mind that is not uncommon to see trains carrying over 200 containers. With double stacking and multiple locomotives
@@ingulari3977 but trains _are_ cool
Yeah, five Borth American-tier container trains per hour would blow any futuristic container cannon out of the water. Freight trains may be the one thing we did a good job of here
@@ingulari3977 Trains aren't cool? You better fucking take that back.
@@ingulari3977 And I'm sorry you can't take a joke.
Yep. The 2:00 freigh train in my city was like two or three times as large as a normal freight train. It was a never ending stream of containers.
The best part of this channel, listening to a grumpy Czech engineer explain why the latest glitzy techno-fix is stupid and don't fix what isn't broken, damn it.
*Hungarian
As someone who drives container trains for a living, after seeing this utter nonsense, I'm feeling incredibly smug.
Go by train, you know it makes sense.
As someone who plays train sims a lot I feel you (just kidding). Where do you work
Thank you for your service. Back when I drove a truck I would go to the massive intermodal area just south of Chicago and always be so amazed at just how much material made it’s way in and out.
We're about 1/4 mile from a freight line and I love hearing the train rumble through. I'm weird I suppose. 😂
Here's another point: In the USA, when a train derails and blocks the route, the mess can be often be cleared from an adjacent road. How would you do that with a stuck pod in a sewer pipe? You do not.
A stuck pod in a sewer pipe 😂😂😂😂 I can’t
rotor rooter to the rescue
Easy.
All you need is a big ass toilet plunger.
@@Pineapple_Pizza1 which creates a vacuum 😂. Only issue: inside the tube is already a vacuum.
@@Pineapple_Pizza1 🤣🤣🤣
Basically, trains are logistics powerhouses and there may never be anything to take their place in mass land distribution.
I disagree once we find a way to teleport shit we get an upgrade but that’s atleast 500y in the future lul
@@dog209 more than likely teleortation (should it ever exist) will be so exorbitantly resource intensive that it will be entirely impractical for mass shipping and only useful for the richest customers willing to pay a few thousand dollars for same-hour delivery on their new iphone.
@@reaganharder1480 Can you fucking imagine the cost of moving A KG of material THROUGH SPACE AND TIME
@@reaganharder1480 I don't think there's any particular reason to think it would cost a lot. It's more of a technical / feasibility issue than anything. Teleportation could just be straight up impossible though, so that sucks.
Well, it comes down to how the heck a teleporter would actually work. Off the top of my head, the two ideas that seem most likely (though still wrought with troublesome implications) are
1. Device A carefully scans every molecule in your body, then annihilates all those molecules and sends the data (and possibly energy from annihilation) to device B, which reconstructs said molecules from atoms made by converting energy. This has a few problems. First off, the amount of data required to accurately recreate every molecule in your body would be absolutely insane, and that's assuming it wouldn't kill you to operate this machine at a low enough precision to not run into problems with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. The computing hardware to handle that kind of data transmission would likely be pretty intense. Though, perhaps we're looking for teleportation that only is used for non-living things, like shoes or the like, so staying alive is less important. You've still got the incredible challenge of effectively building an object atom by atom if this method is to work. And we haven't even gotten to energy requirements yet. Assuming i've properly understood physics, the energy released by the initial annihilation of the item would be equal to the ever famous E=MC^2, in which E is the energy in Joules, M is the mass in Kg, and C is the speed of light in M/S. Based on this, a 1 Kg object would release around 9 TerraJoules of energy into device A, which for scale, is roughly 1/10th the energy released by the Fat Man bomb that leveled Nagasaki in WW2. Then device B would need the same amount of energy, plus whatever is lost due to system inefficiencies, to rebuild the item in question. Now you ask "why not just send all the energy from device A to device B?" which would probably be the best idea, but the logistics of actually transmitting that kind of power is... extreme. I'm no expert in the field of electrical engineering, but I am very doubtful an electrical system can be made to operate reasonably cheaply while being capable of transmitting nuclear detonation levels of power, and trying to do that wirelessly has even more problems.
Option number 2. Device A creates artificial gravity (or antigravity) to warp space time so hard that it folds back onto itself and creates a wormhole. Now, spacetime is very confusing and i don't really understand it, so I can't say much about this, except that I'm pretty sure wormholes (if they are possible at all) require black hole levels of gravity, which has plenty of destructive implications for whatever is around it.
All that to say, I am HIGHLY doubtful that teleportation will EVER exist. If we're lucky, we might manage some kind of hyperdrive that allows near-lightspeed space travel, though even that is mostly only hypotheticals based on weird space-timey stuff I don't actually understand.
I like your advocacy for rail. People might not find it sexy anymore and governments do their best to destroy it - because it is public service - but all things considered, it is for most cases, the best transportation system ever designed.
It is not sexy, it is useful
EcoAku Irrelevant whether someone considers it "sexy" or not. That is purely subjective crap. I can claim busses and trains are sexy.
Trains have always been sexy.
@@theultimatereductionist7592 respectable.
Until flying cars and shuttles come about
But rail is definitely the best mass transport method devised so far
As a German I can tell you, even if this whole thing worked they would really have fun with the regulations especially in terms of safety you have here. Not to mention the law suits etc
Your electric highway in Hesse is more realistic
Oh yes, the Germany safety regulations are byzantine and make any large scale infrastructure project almost impossible. See the Brandenburg Airport for a good example. This thing would never get out of the paper.
@@fresagrus4490 Even IF it would, there would be so many delays that the company would run out if money soon enough
@@Dutchwheelchair Hahahaha, that thing is a fucking joke.
@@fresagrus4490 They aren't Byzantine. Your reference on that airport is correct, but the reason for the delay was the politic meddling as they changed large parts of the airport after building was already in progress and this caused cascades of problems.
The fact that they highlighted Elon Musk not being involved is hilarious.
"we're not affiliated with that jerk!"
Probably cause Elon doesn't want to affiliate with dead projects
@@ascherlafayette8572 🤣
Musk got them into this "startup doing a maglev in a near vacuum" which may not sit well with them now that they see what they are actually up against versus him chuckling and saying "it's simple, it's just like an air hockey table".
@@ascherlafayette8572 Oh really? When did he start?
I’m convinced that the main reason Reddit tech dude bros are so in love with Musk-style technology “innovations” is because they are so isolated from the world that they genuinely don’t know what large-scale logistical technology already exists. The hyperloop sounds awesome only if you don’t already know how well trains work.
This works super well in Us where we dont really see trains that much and it can be easy to assume they arent that useful if you already arent well educated on transport
@@leaffinite2001 ~the second nightly coal train rattling my house by air pressure alone~ *WHAT WAS THAT?*
The only reason is they are in love with Musk already. Any bullshit he says is gospel.
Well said
@@RandomUserX99 Meanwhile he's putting man on Mars
Speed has never killed anyone. Suddenly becoming stationary, that's what gets you. - Jeremy Clarkson
Speed Kills.
This is ‘bong’ science. It falls apart the moment the high wears off. We really have to discourage dropping huge sums on such projects just because we can.
Aahahah first time I hear somebody use the term which I coined in my head.... Explained exactly as I also think of it
Exactly, like all those idiots that believed that humans could fly one day.
This is... yeah this is oddly specific but incredibly accurate
Oh beautiful ... BONG SCIENCE ... ROTFLMAO.
I'll poblably call this "Bugman Science"...
German here: there is NO way they'll be even able to build this in Germany of all places. There are so many settlements & regulations which means tons and tons of money "wasted" on compensation for residents on/around the trackline even if it is underground. On top of that depending on where you are the soil is completely different/inconsistent. You'd have to measure it in the smallest increments wasting precious time/money again. On top of that those tunnel drillers are way too slow to even build the tunnels at the speed they had estimated previously (not sure if thats still up to date tho so don't quote me)
Let's start with the fact that they can't even build an airport over here ;)
@@k-tech2937 Or a Bahnhof.
"Niemand hat die Absicht, einen Bahnhof zu eröffnen!"
@@k-tech2937 That is not true! We can! We have even rebuild it completely once by the time we finish it!
btw. the BER opened not long ago, in still the middle of Corona, and everyone was going "Yes, of course now". And btw.2 it's opened, but not really finished, but I guess they thought if nearly nobody flies, nobody will notice half of it not functioning properly.
How about making tunnels with the Boring Company? Much more faster and cost efficient than traditional tunneling.
The older I get, the more I understand the people who're obsessed with trains...
Seriously, trains, trams, and buses could really make transport much more accessible
Yeah public transport is sick
Yes but rich people don't care about such things as "public" transports or public anything for that matter. They want do be alone in their own golden towers, because regular people like us are perceived as cockroaches, we smell like piss and all that. Am I right?
I mean if you want to transport more cargo just make the trains twice as wide and have two rails support them instead of one, gg.
Based
@@kyarumomochi5146 but ships don't go on land my dear
"The HyperPort Is Dumb And Will Most Likely Explode" sounds like a terroist threat
It isnt a threat but i wish it was
The western world is it's own most dangerous terrorist most of the times. The few real idiots are just the scapegoats for everything we f**k up. lol
😂
And if no one will blow it up, I will, just to prove the point.
oh, wait
@@federicotarenzi1955 , see? It's tempting even for normal people. lol
Surely, maintaining thousands of miles of huge depressurized tubes won't lead to massive infrastructure problems.
The next evolution of this scheme: Hypership! 1 container per ship.
Somehow still needs a near-vacuum tube, except over the water.
It needs to go brrrr so it must have jet engines. Bonus points for radioactive fuel
Gotta love how hyper is now the same for BS fake shit as "gate" is for scandals
Next:
HyperXship: 2 ships per container
@@mattbailey1515 that would suck
You need ultra high vaccum tubes with RGB, and those tubes would run under the fucking ocean floor
Omg, you just solved the puzzle. Let's implement pods and blockchain and call it podchain. It will effectively be a train, but sexy and scientific because it has chain in the name.
Connect the pods and it’s a hyperchain of pods. Seems familiar.
Nah, pogchamp is better, or maybe hyper-photonic-ledRGB-pogchamp
sticks and stones may break my bones but chains and pods excite me lmao
@@crispybanana3198 chains excite me too 👀
Needs more quantum computers and machine learning. Throw in the word "smart" too.
Making a more aerodynamic train would be more efficient than removing atmosphere along an entire line
That depends on how many politicians and CEOs you manage to convince to get into the line before you remove the atmosphere, really.
politicians: "what is your company called on the stock market?"
litterally just build a mag-lev/bullet train
@CatandBonez why are you against hyperloop? Do you hate jewws? Are you a nazzi?
@CatandBonez that's.. that's the dumbest take I've read today.
The capacity is absolutely hilarious. I work at a railyard in a large country, we load over 168 containers double stacked on one outbound train, now this takes up to 4 engines linked to move but using this "hyper loop" system would cripple the entire country, food and good shortages would be rampant, not to mention straight tracks are near impossible considering our landscape.
This stuff sounds cool and futuristic on paper but to anyone actually working in these industries they claim to be revolutionizing its hilariously stupid.
What large country that you work at this railyard is?
How long does it actually take to load one of those full trains? My only problem with this video was the math saying you could load a 40 container train in less than an hour which sounds way too fast
@@calebisaacs4760 usa most probably because of double stacks being widely used in NA
For this to ever be viable would require a leap in technology and available resources, as well as a basically peaceful world, otherwise we'll have the issue of terrorists having easy to fuck targets.
@@vreaper45 Sounds fairly easy to me. Just requires parallel container handlers, just like the flashy pod CGI doesn't have.
I love this.
As a designer I hate these kinds of concepts, adding no value to our world. Thank you for being so brutally honest, yet completely right.
The problem I'm seeing is what happens if the cargo containers become misaligned in the pods? If this is supposed to be a near-vacuum system, that means there's little-to-no leeway in changes in dimensions. How do you get a container out once it's misaligned? What happens when if the doors don't close properly? This system seems to have absolutely no room for error and would require hundreds of additional specialists just to keep it running.
@@joeldykman7591 considering how frequently cargo bins in airliners become misaligned, or create an unbalanced loading, I'd be very surprised if a hyperloop didn't encounter this kind of issue often. That implies some kind of load balancing requirement (can't be end heavy either) for every container to meet a tolerance or be rejected.
What do you design? What HAVE you designed?-may we see it?
@@GregorKropotkin-qu2hp Someone's salty lmao
@@GregorKropotkin-qu2hp you must have some credibility yourself before questioning others.
Ah, yes, my favourite complaining channel. Refreshing.
Tbh if it is deconstructing it in detail its just a debunking channel
I do like how their solution to "low energy, high efficiency" transport is a fucking monorail/maglev in a vacuum tube carrying single containers at a time.
It’s like they’re just incapable of imagining a train or its derivatives. Linking the pods together and putting them on regular tracks for higher capacity is just impossible to comprehend for wannabe futurists
@@MotorcycleWrites Someone needs to tattoo "Faster does not equal better or more efficient" on the backs of their hands or something because they're clearly incapable of imagining any improvement that isn't just making something fast.
What I don't get is, if they are lowering the pressure, why is it streamlined? The whole point of a vac-tube train is that you lower air-friction by putting the train in a low-pressure tunnel. You can use regular electric cargo trains, you don't need some special sealed pod thing, just a sealed cab for the engineer.
Also, building your vac tubes above ground is stupid, then you have to incorporate expansion joints for thermal expansion. More complexity to try and seal to pull a vacuum.
@@Reddsoldier there's a saying for that already in the Army. "Slow is smooth, smooth is fast".
@@MotorcycleWrites
Small doge meme : "Myeah, but, mmmh-trains are mmmh-always toommcrowded and mmhstinky and you're mmhalways standing up !!! Mmmhpods are more comfortable and limited !!! MMMhI don't wanna compromise, and it's mmmhimpossible to improve trains right mmhnow !!!'
"Resistant to all weather conditions"
*earthquake enters the chat*
I like that the solution to all of these problems is just to make trains more futurestically designed
Not even futuristic... Just build a gd train...
I disagree. Classical/traditional trains look much better than cold and soulless futuristic train designs.
safe-and-reliable-operating-speed (SAROS) 1-atm no-tube multi-linked hyperpod
This is taking trains but ruining them
Futuristic train is actually a scam
Ah, another episode of "why not just build a train"? My favorite
Cause it’s 2021, not futuristic enough
Very much the best videos haha
Trains are the perfect machine
Modifing old engines can help
@@elijahmarshall9787 cars are all terrain private and have more personality
Why does the pod need to look so aerodynamic if it's travelling in a near vacuum? Reminds me of movies putting wings on starships that have no need to go into a planet's atmosphere.
Keyword “near.” They’re trying to squeeze every ounce of speed out of it as they can.
@@commondognut near enough to boil the oxygen out of your blood
@@commondognut if it's even a _near_ vacuum, the few remaining particles would never be able to act like air.
@@dhruvtukadiya why not? That’s exactly what they are, isn’t it?
@@commondognut A near vacuum environment has so few particles that they simply cannot provide any resistance to matter (that's the whole point of a vacuum). So trying to make an aerodynamic design for such an environment is just increasing drag.
That "Inland Port" sounds like they reinvented warehouses
...but worse in every concievable aspect.
"Much of the social history of the Western world over the past three decades has involved replacing what worked with what sounded good." - Thomas Sowell
1: create a problem that does not exist
2: sell the solution
OR
1: fuck up something that already works
2: sell the solution
The people who designed this are geniuses, they made the pods extremely aerodynamic so all the air in the VACUUM tube doesn't slow it down.
If the trains truly rely on vacuum to pull them forwards then it would make more sense to make the trains the least aerodynamic shape possible.
@@EvsEntps vacuum refers to the lack of air in the tunnel not that it is getting sucked. In a vacuum there is no air resistance
@@chullupa How is the vacuum created? From one end of the pipe or at places along the pipe?
@@EvsEntps couldn't find the information, but presumably along multiple parts of the track
I think this is only a partial vacuum, to reduce drag, but not entirely eliminate it. Makes the air pumps not have to be so expensive and less risk than a near total vacuum.
That quote basically describing single-point failures disrupting the entire supply chain gave me flashbacks to the Evergreen stuck in the Suez Canal
well actually our system of using 1 vehicle to move thousands of tons of cargo is why evergreen was a big problem with smaller transportation it's less likely to cause full supply chain paralysis.
not misunderstand me this is still dumb af
No, the Evergreen problem is not an issue with the boats themselves, but an issue with having a narrow channel that can become blocked easily.
Roads are generally immune to this as beyond some local blockages it is usually fairly easily to reroute around any blockage and keep most other traffic running while resolving the snarl.
Trains are more vulnerable since they have fewer alternative paths, but in general it is still possible to reroute traffic.
The hyperloop/hyperport is pretty much designed to completely fail at the slightest hesitation.
I love how well the younger folks (I'm 68, so that's a lot of folks) are covering BS. Miniminuteman (archeological conspiracies), Casual Geographic (animals and Nature) and you are some of my favorites. Excellent vids, funny AND I learn stuf. Thank you for your excellent content.
This guy talks bullshit most of the time but yeah I also learn from these videos sometimes
Apparently, all you need for a modern engineering company is some skill in Blender.
LOL!
Dahir Insaat were ahead of the curve
@@Graknorke this has everything a Dahir Insaat video has except for the narrator
And lo-fi beats to scam Tesla investers to
All you need for a kickstarter scam
As a wise man said, "it's not one single revolutionary idea that will change the industry, but lots of small improvements", and that's why high-speed trains (TGV and Shinkansen) are successful
it's truly bizarre that people think this shit is revolutionary. there isn't some hard physical limitation that's preventing us from simply building faster trains. it's just that there's no reason to do so. the relevant economic pressures are selecting for dense, (relatively) slow rail networks over sparser high speed point-to-point lines.
@@user-lk2vo8fo2q Exactly, it's not a totally different technology like that will change everything, if we adopted trains for so long it's because they have a reliability record that has never been beaten, they can go fast, are relatively easy to build and cheaper than the hyperloop and other nonsense, they can transport a massive amount of passanger or marchandise and the whole installation is easier to maneuver than the hyperloop or a monorail for example (especially for track switches)
@@user-lk2vo8fo2q
It really gets worse the more you think about it. If it's a port, it means the freight has been at sea most likely for months until then. It's low speed high efficiency freight. A standard freight train won't travel for a month, it'll only add a few days to the total travel. You want cost efficiency at that point, and one extra day isn't worth that much. Or at least, if you want to save time, the boats is where you should be looking for improvements. In fact, a 5% speed boost to boats will be 3 days for a 2 month travel.
The only place where this would even remotely make sense would be for high speed freight, for example by plane. But planes don't transport containers and the freight isn't moved over huge distances after that, since you can just get the aircraft to fly at the closest airport. So again, the concept completely fails.
It's absolutely the case of someone desperately looking for a problem to use their "solution".
@@ivanlagrossemoule the only aspect of their plan that has any potential at all is the thing about unloading the boat directly onto a train and then moving it to an inland warehouse for cheaper than you could already do that with trucks or rail. obviously their system won't actually be capable of doing that efficiently, but i could see the economic case for something which actually could.
Truly revolutionary stuff usually have inherent technological or methodological advantages that far outstrip the current system to the point that it is cost feasible to rip out the existing system to laid in the new one. Like how steam ships outstripped wind powered sailing ships and barges, or how locomotive trains outstripped animal driven transport on land. Until then, most practical improvements will always be on existing system until you reach technological saturation.
Even today's high speed rail is not technically a true revolution; it uses existing rail technology put on steroids and its most expensive part is building new straighter, wider rails or to modify existing ones. Hyperloop is not the kind of revolutionary system to rip out existing rail system or good enough to spend so much money to build a dedicated infrastructure just for it.
"The more sophisticated the device, the more vulnerable it is to primitive attack. "
We do a lil Кабоом
Not always true, but I like the quote
I like your qoute, but i doubt spear can penetrate Tiger II
@@justsomerandomweeb4243 Glass bottle with funny liquid inside and piece of burning rag attached can destroy it tho
@@atee5912 ah i see unga bunga finally have access to the funny liquid.
My fav part of the Hyperloop concept is how passengers/cargo will float along on a cushion of air... in a vacuum! 😅
it's actually magnetic levitation.
maglev
@@karlmarx3705 Yeah, whatever bullshit fantasy you want to believe. There is already a working Maglev system in China, designed in Germany. Despite the brilliant engineering involved, its expensive af, that is why you don't see widespread implementation. Musk is a joker who invested in Tesla, kicked the founders out and is somehow a genius! Asshole would be closer to the truth, and the Boring Company is pure vapourware!
"and the process is as follows: take something that works, has a good economy of scale and is efficient etc, take it apart into small inefficient pieces, make the pieces look like futuristic sex toys and call them "pods"
oh man, that cracked me up. Brilliant writing and delivery. I'm a fan.
That's genius. You shoot a single hole through some tube, and half of europe explodes. Imagine the emergency broadcasts. "The shockwave will reach the France hyperport in approximately sixteen minutes. Try to get as far from the tube as you can. Any cargo pods that contact the shockwave at any point of the track are expected to destroy all objects within a fifty meter radius.
There's a movie SAS: Rise of the Black Swan and in it they blow up a gas line between Britain and France. The entire thing just explodes and wreaks havoc. This is exactly how I'd imagine the disaster would go.
A vacuum tube certainly doesn't explode when you shoot a hole in it...
A vacuum isn't a nuclear warhead. The volume of space with no air compared to the surrounding atmosphere is basically negligible. A hole would do a lot of damage to the system itself as pressure inside renormalised, but it would be extremely localised. It would also be an implosion due to air rushing into the tube, not out, so collateral damage would be fairly minimal.
So y'all recon one of them pods meeting this pressure renormalization head on at full speed would be ok, eh? Even worse this kind of thing relies on its shape to withstand the pressure. If it gets a creased by something, it's gonna do a reenactment of that tanker truck implosion test video, and I wouldn't want to stand anywhere near any supports it might be connected to if that happens. Thing would look like one of those snakes that feign death in an overly dramatic fashion.
@@belgiumbunlover5787 in terms of influence, I would put them pretty even with a nuclear warhead. Such a weakpoint in any country. Horrible idea.
The backers would be a bit pissed off when they get a small tunnel with a few tesla cars doing 30 mph.
Now imagine that this tunnel doesn't actually go in a straigth line to your destination but instead follows the road on the surface.
Shaking so violently that all your goods scramble.
Stumbling across this channel has made me realize that all of humanity is doomed and we should all turn into trains
given that we're biological, I think our destiny is to evolve into *crab*
@@demon_xd_ Mammals can't evolve into crabs. Our true destiny is to return to monkee.
@@concept5631 Sounds like we need to keep regressing until we can turn into crabs
Crabs that ride trains....
@@markbo3251 noooooooooooooo
"I don't want to turn my channel into a 24/7 Elon Musk dunkfest"
I for one would absolutely love if this was the case lol
We already have one of those, search common sense skeptic.
same
Yes, yes and more yes. As an engineer and tech enthusiast, I am really ticked off by people thinking that Musk is some sort of real world Tony Stark. He's a businessman (some of which are snake oil), not an innovator.
I'm ready for the horde of angry Musk cultists.
I wouldn’t, we already have Thunderfoot.
We cannot even build a new "Y" rail link between Hamburg, Bremen and Hannover without everyone complaining and a 50 years delay! So how should this work?
Yeah, and if they just find just a single grasshopper that might go extinct because of this project you can add another 50 years.
thats actually a bigger problem than eveything else, you do make a great point
Eh, well I mean, this time it's a private project, and if it's ever tried, it would be so cool and new, and maybe also international, or even if just nationwide, news that it'll pass better and be faster, I'd say
Not saying that it'd work better, if even that, but...
@@marcm8665 wouldn‘t happen if someone would consult people who know the nature from the start. Any species going extinct can kill an entire ecosystem. Moral of the story consider nature from the start and nobody needs to get annoyed by it :)
@@nicholasleclerc1583 Texas is attempting a private high speed rail system that is 100% private and they still run into problems with land acquisition and environmental issues. And that's Texas possibly the most friendly state to business.
I'm really surprised that a "normal" freight train in Europe is 40 containers per train. The ones I pass in the desert of the USA are easily 100 containers. I've only bothered to count them twice: 110 and 112, both in 2018.
Very frequent urban environments with a lot of railroad crossings, some as close as a few hundred meters don't allow long trains (passengers or freight) that could block cars and trucks traffic inside cities if the locomotive breaks down. Also the railroad traffic itself is almost always more intense in Europe and can be very easily perturbated.
That's also why you can essentially find road trains in Australia, Canada and US due to the ultra sparse environment where they're circulating and the quasi non-existing presence of other vehicles on the roads they're using.
When I was little, I lived right by the railroad on the Hudson River. Counted two trains that had 152 and 141 containers
Here in the Benelux we have canals that connect little towns in the Ardennes with big harbours like Gent and Antwerp and if the water doesn’t work we still have trains for overland journeys
We don't need that much cargo per train and it would halt traffic to long
The maximum train length in Germany (and most other central european countries) is 740 m (~0.45 mil) on some routes up to 835 m, a standard electric locomotive for this job ist about 20 m long for this length you usually use 2, so 700 m of freight wagons. Sggrs wagons are 26.7 m long and can carry 2 * 40 ft or 4 * 20 ft containers.
So one can fit up to 104 TEU or 52 FEU on one 740 m train.
I don't know if the idea is still pursued but there was a discussion to raise the overhead wiring between Rotterdam and Duisburg so one could double-stack the containers almost doubling the train capacity.
@chucku00 The limiting factor in length is because of the length of the stations and passing loops, not the level crossings. It doesn't really matter if you wait 2 or 3 minutes and especially on major railway lines and important road connections you won't find any level crossings anyway. Besides, locomotive breakdowns where the route is blocked for longer than a few minutes are pretty rare.
And that's not even taking into account trains in North America where the intermodal trains can have well over 200 containers per train since our trains are able to double stack the containers. So now with that same math at 7 trains per hour, that's 1400+ containers per hour, which ends up being 23.33+ containers per minute. Even with a 12 minute headway, that's still 16.66+ containers per minute.
But with such long trains, even a 12-minute headway would be optimistic. Those trains are slow and have very low acceleration and deceleration, so ideally you want them as far apart as possible, since otherwise even the slightest delay would cause disruption.
With such long trains you’re looking at intervals of 20 minutes at best, but more likely 30 minutes. That’s still 400 containers per hour (6.666… per minute), which is still even better than Adam’s estimates, but not quite at the level you’re suggesting.
@@KasabianFan44 It depends on the mainline. Some lines have a higher volume of traffic than others
@@GreenOverRed
No line in the entire world has the capacity to carry 1400 containers per hour. That was literally my whole point.
@@KasabianFan44 I'm not saying you're wrong persay, I'm saying it varies by rail line and it does. You aren't going to measure rail traffic density in Elkhart, Indiana, then apply that density to a place like Needles, California, or Altoona, Pennsylvania. Every part of the US rail line is different in one way or another.
Places like Tehachapi, California is going to have far less dense rail traffic cause trains there are restricted to no more than around 23MPH and much of the line is single track. On the other hand, Barstow, California is going to be far more dense, as it is a major artery that receives eastbound trains from the Ports of LA and Long Beach, as well as other commodities from Bakersfield, California. Not to mention westbound traffic heading into Barstow from Arizona, Nevada and elsewhere. And that's on top of the fact that two railroads, both BNSF and Union Pacific flow through there. But of course, not all lines are that dense.
when you showed that quote about a linear supply chain being dangerous, first thing i thought about was: yeah, there was that boat that got stuck in a canal some time back...
Boat gets stuck, world economy goes
📉
📉
📉
📉
📉
@@ShadowsOfTheSky not stonks
And it wasn't an historic boat in a national park service canal either
There's a reason why trains and ships stayed for so long. The only thing to improve is their efficiency and drive system.
Are you the one that made art of war
@@dinmamma8589 Trains stayed for around 200 years...
Horses have been around for millennia...
I guess we should move back to horses ;-)
@@yuriysemenikhin302 Yeah we built horses when? Cause these guys are talking about technologies we’ve created dumb dumb
@@n0body550 Besides, yes better techs were invented, and it is possible to replace a conventional method with a new invention. But nothing of these tech transitions happened overnight or with a single truly revolutionary Elon Musk-esque invention. They happened in iterations, sometimes taking up decades.
Even in their domain of digital technology, taking the smartphone as an example, iPhone didn't really "revolutionize" the industry. The concept had existed years before they made it, it was their execution that got everything right. The whole smartphone as a concept was nothing new at the time.
So if anyone pitches a totally new tech that is better in every way than the conventional tech, and promises to revolutionize the industry in one single invention, it's probably BS.
@@paulaldo9413 not really bs if someone has a single invention to revolutionise something, theres plenty of inventions in history that have revolutionised things its just how wary and pessimistic people can be to prevent it happening, i agree its unlikely but not bs
As ships crew. I say yes! Please make this take 2 weeks. I want to enjoy each port town. Right now container ships unload to fast to be able to enjoy the towns.
What if the ships were even bigger
how fast exactly?
@@siddhantbasnet8528 typically less that 12-14 hours
@@Theinatoriinator that’s actually surprisingly fast. I’m honestly amazed seeing how much they carry
@@Theinatoriinator THAT IS FUCKING WILD! I though that, at best, it would cost like 2 or 3 days to unload all!
Of course this is ridiculous, what we need are hyper canals large enough for container ships. These canals would allow the container ships to deliver the shipping containers direct to retailers, avoiding the port bottlenecks, we can build these canals along any and all existing infrastructure. Simply install draw bridges at all intersections (only slightly increasing travel times) for land based vehicles, and then we could build locks to navigate mountainous terrain.
No we need trains
Hmm.... If only such devices existed....
Soon introducing: HyperDisappointment, now with 40% more vacuums.
Shut up and take my money!
40% more vacuums: it really sucks!
Also soon intoducing:
The hyper render image
Now with 45% more shaders
"Elon Musk is not involved"
@@svampebob007 we got Elon on this project just so we could kick him off
So Hyperloop is just very fast lone freight? That is not very economical.
I think you are giving them too much credit. For now it does not even exist besides shiny "gib us money" videos.
Even some steam locomotives can pull more stuff pre hour(let's say grain)
think of all the lonely pods.... if only they had friends to connect up too and travel together in a long chain!
@⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻ u can pull 2 or 3 containers with an truck...thank the manufacturers using big engines so they only rev to 3.5000rpm
@⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻ here is the engine size thing
Biggest engine in an mass production car
2013/14 dodge viper 8.4 liters
Average truck engine size
14 to 16.5 liters
I am adding the prefix Hyper- and X- and Quantum- to all my math papers & theorems. That signifies I am a supergenius who will save the world & everybody should give me billions of dollars.
Mega-. Megagenius. Super-? OK, Boomer.
(Giga- and tera- don't have that great mmmmmouthfeel.)
Also add 'plug and play' and 'disruptive technology'.
I would be worried about being sued for trademark infringement...
*hypergenius
@@docmcstuffins7892 Not give, "inherit riches from your parent who was rich purely through happenstance"
If ever in life I have any sort of issue, because of this channel my first thought will always be "Can I fix it with a train?"
Need to be somewhere? Train?
Not enough money? Train?
Weak musculature? Train?
Chose a wife that is too annoying? Train?
"If a freight rail line is clogged, we can just reroute around the wreck."
North American railroads abandoning parallel routes: "Are you sure about that?"
Actually, North American rail systems still have a lot of parallel capacity. The major transcontinental rail lines are often replicated by other lines that travel through different parts of the country, and all that would be needed to bypass a major derailment or sabotaged facility would be to run trains on those parallel lines, then use interconnecting lines to get to the desired destination.
You're probably right. The Moffat Tunnel could be closed, and if it wasn't for the overland route trains couldn't get to California
@Karl-Heinz Erlenhain Poland railroads get rid of a connection to that camp
The plan is to build it in Europe, where population density is a lot higher than in the US, and railroads are actually seen as a major mode of transportation, so rerouting is not that difficult.
@@siamsurf But you must see that this is fantasy and will never be built.
Why would anyone go through all this effort to deliver a container from a seaport to an inland logistic center much faster? Let me reiterate, FROM A SEAPORT. That container has been on a ship possibly for weeks and there is a company that wants to cut down a day-long train trip at the end of its journey to a few hours. So after all of this investment, we lower the total delivery time of a container across the ocean from three weeks to... basically three weeks. After establishing that speed is a major selling point this is the patient's missing head. If we want something delivered fast across oceans then it was most likely already on an airplane. If a container is waiting in a port it's a safe bet speed wasn't an issue. So for me, the biggest problem here is that this is a solution for a non-existing problem.
even every other point they had doesn't work, like reducing emissions. most rail lines in western Europe are already electrified. we just need to use exclusively electric trains and not use trucks for trips to destinations far away from the port.
I managed a container terminal for 10 years, the delicate pods would be wrecked in no time by crane drivers on bonus. A ship like the Ever Given costs up to a million dollars a day whilst not moving containers about.
Solid point, well made
"So for me, the biggest problem here is that this is a solution for a non-existing problem."
Well, not quite. The problem still does exist - it would be nice to move things from sea ports to inland ports and other places much more quickly.
Just there are too many costs and impracticalities about this proposal for it to be a workable solution to that problem (which does exist).
@@Lanthanideification Counterpoint: t r a i n
@@patrickstump4681 t r e i n
Adam explaining how to sabotage the hyperlopp:
Domestic terrorists: interesting
@@pikachulovesketchup666 ok cia agent. Sheesh! 👀
Hell, I don't think explosive have to be involved. Hire or steal a Digger, attach the drill, BAM pillar is now being drilled out
@@pikachulovesketchup666 If you dont care about the timing of the failure, you can just sit back and enjoy as heat cycles and rain do their thing until eventually one tiny little rupture shows up anywhere in the 500km tube
Honestly the last point with sabotage reads like a Bosnian Ape Society video.
Where the Hyperport will easily be prone to Russian infestation, in a similar manner to a house having a termite infestation. Like you open up a pod, and see a bunch of Spetsnaz agents in it.
Frankly, any terrorist can figure it out just by looking at it.
I find it ironic that the caption "Welcome to a new era of reliability" (at 1:35) comes up while showing a truck that uses two disconnected power units instead of just one.
Also, why hurry the container the last few kilometers after sitting on a ship for weeks?
It's just a concept. Once they figure out faster-than-light transportation, they can use it to make up earlier delays.
So much this. A big part of logistics is planning. They slow down ships on purpose to safe on fuel costs. They can afford to do this because they planned their supply lines months in advance. Those few minutes saved in the end is not going to matter at all lol.
@survivaltest 370 Nah, use my new idea, the Hyperrocket.
@@renerpho lmao!
@@qty1315 the comment section is comedy gold lol
There's a reason why pneumatic tubes didn't replace the postal service.
Yep, but i love those pneumatic tubes.
@@curtisalex456 until someone plans to put you into one tube
They mangled limbs
I like water slides but I have to agree.
Even if we had a proper evolution of transportation it'll take a cataclysm to get the people in charge to give up paved roads or any other infrastructure well set in place.
Imagine watching a pod break down and then ten more pods slam into the back of it at 600 mph
kmh*
About 360mph
Oh that's alright then
That would look like straight from a Michael Bay movie lmao.
@@nylex5206 And have the pod behind transporting nitrates and act as an oxidiser
Don't worry, the software of the future is flawless. The super-intelligent AI of 2025 will fix all the problems you could ever think of.
They were delighted to be the first group
riding the new Hyper vacuum Loop.
There was a fault, which caused a quick halt,
it took forever to scoop out the goop.
In Germany we have been busy debating about the infrastructure to deliver electricity from the North to the South for more than four years, with the citizens of basically every second town along the way launching a campaign against having one or two electrical poles build in their vague facinity and demanding compensation. By now there are serious considerations about running the lines underground, which would be far more expensive... And that's with electrical poles and wires that can be routed at a 45° angle when needed and are, compared to such a project, basically invisible. So... No way they would get from Hamburg to Frankfurt, Köln or wherever they were planning to go.
Well, they are kinda right. High voltage electric cables caused higher cancer rates in an apartment building next to it here in italy.
@@josifstalin4372 No they are wrong. The electro magnetic field caused by high voltage electric cables is on the ground only a fraction of the earth's elctro magnetic field.
@@capitaen_proton9480 problem is statistics said that the cancer rate was 10 times higher in these apartments close to high voltage cables than normal.
@@josifstalin4372 correlation isn't connection. There are so many factors that can increase cancer rates and a lot of them were used in buildings for years.
@@josifstalin4372 could also be that there were some materials used in the building that caused the cancer. at least that sounds more likely to me than the cancer beeing caused by the cables
I’m a truck driver and trust me when I tell you that these transportation and logistics companies are more than willing to sacrifice safety and everything else for speed.
While I believe you, they are businesses. Outside of the US, in developed nations anyway (ignore the Emirates please), this won't be implemented on any real level, the numbers cause it to be cut very quickly. And considering the cost to get even one line of this going in Europe of all places (as the video covers, they have to buy so much land since it needs a straight line), it's dead in the water already, most likely.
@@MindForgedManacle Buying land is a moot point, as is the straight line bit. Has to be built subterranean, only realistic way to do it. Also possible to "chamber" large sections so they aren't subject to any more than expected minor parasitic loss of vacuum, then it's just much much smaller "vacuumlocks" that have to be depressurized each time a carriage passes through.
That aside, it's still a looooooong way from financially viable.
Your safety. Not the cargo's safety.
:(
I am speed
@@masondegaulle5731 Property rights in many countries are generally understood to extend all the way down to the center of the Earth. People have been successfully sued for oil drilling hundreds of meters below other people's property.
Not to mention that where there's land with buildings, there's infrastructure. Even if you're building underground and avoid the legal clusterfuck, there's still foundations and sewage and power lines to deal with.
As a German I can tell you one thing: You dont want to buy a straight line of land in Germany, trust me.
I trust you, but I wonder why?
@@Karak-_- Because every piece of land is owned by someone and unlike the US the pieces are pretty small. So you have to buy a lot of them from various owners who often dont want to sell.
The next problem are the neighbours. If you want to build something, the neighbours can raise an objection, which will atleast cost you a lot of time before you can start construction (again you have a lot of neighbours and some will for sure have a problem).
Even governmental projects sometimes struggle with those problems.
@@timiwer Thanks for assuring me that the Hyperport can never be built :)
Brenner basis tunnel 😅
@@timiwer the whole project would've looked like an awkward spider net💀
Someone should introduce these fellas to the concept of a bullet train 😂
Trains are litterally communism