Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Earth Technology Hardware

The First Hyperloop System Will Connect Passengers From Dubai To Abu Dhabi In Twelve Minutes (techcrunch.com) 75

Posted by BeauHD from the don't-blink dept.
Hyperloop One has announced today that it would build the first commercial hyperloop transportation system from Dubai to Abu Dhabi -- a trip that would take only twelve minutes. TechCrunch reports: The journey is 99 miles (159.4 km) long and normally takes about two hours by car but H1 promises it would take a mere 12 minutes in the hyperloop. H1 is partnering with the Dubai Roads and Transport Authority (RTA) to evaluate the feasibility of building this system in greater Dubai and the UAE and the announcement follows the next stage of development for the company, which is gearing up for its "Kitty Hawk" moment early next year when H1 will test a full-scale prototype of its system in the Nevada desert. It's also part of the company's next stage of progress in Dubai. Last August H1 co-founder Shervin Pishevar hinted the first hyperloop would be built overseas and the company announced in October it received $50 million in funding from DP World Group of Dubai, the third-largest ports operator in the world, to build a hyperloop system to move cargo throughout the country and the world. You can watch H1's new video that shows their "vision for the future of mobility" here.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The First Hyperloop System Will Connect Passengers From Dubai To Abu Dhabi In Twelve Minutes More

The First Hyperloop System Will Connect Passengers From Dubai To Abu Dhabi In Twelve Minutes

Comments Filter:

  • No, I don't think it will. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by newcastlejon ( 1483695 ) on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @05:52PM (#53241471)

    Funny how the headline gets "will connect passengers" from "evaluate the feasibility".

    Then again, those guys do have shitloads of money and very little in the way of restraint when it comes to spending it...

  • In other words (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward

    In other words,
    Musk is excited about the opportunities afforded by middle eastern countries that build their economies around forced unpaid labor. "it wasn't that big of a stretch compared to the capitalist system we're all used to," Musk was quoted as laughing to himself, as he swam around in his Scrooge McDuckian vault

  • Cost effective test region. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 91degrees ( 207121 ) on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @05:56PM (#53241499) Journal
    This does seem like a more sensble test track than LA to SF. At least land is cheap (mostly desert), power is cheap (mostly oil and solar) and labour is cheap (mostly slave).

    • Re:Cost effective test region. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by SumDog ( 466607 ) on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @06:15PM (#53241599) Homepage Journal

      I hope it succeeded personally. There are a lot of naysayers and this would totally shut them up. It'll be a good two decades at least though before it's in production.

    • This does seem like a more sensble test track than LA to SF. At least land is cheap (mostly desert), power is cheap (mostly oil and solar) and labour is cheap (mostly slave).

      I wonder if it will ever happen in the US. They tried to put in a high speed train from Philadelphia to Pittsburgh, and people reacted like they were demanding to have Jerry Sandusky play Santa Claus in every school in the state. We seem to be in a wealth extraction phase now.

      One of those rare situations where the Democrats and Republicans all lined up. For different reasons, but howling was the word of the day.

    • This does seem like a more sensble test track than LA to SF. At least land is cheap (mostly desert), power is cheap (mostly oil and solar) and labour is cheap (mostly slave).

      And best of all, no California regulations, Green warriors, or NIMBYites.

    • Technically, you're right that a 160-km vacuum tube is *more* feasible than a 1000-km vacuum tube, but in reality, neither is feasible [youtube.com].

  • 12 minutes to complete the journey (Score:5, Insightful)

    by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @06:00PM (#53241515)

    But only 5 minutes before passengers get impatient and complain they're not there already.

  • He take a 'meeting' pod...privately...to the train, through the tunnel, and then it becomes his taxi to take to his mom's party.

    There's no way I'm able to afford that.

  • The people from Dubai don't like the Flintstones, but the people from Abu Dhabi do.

  • I have to ask... (Score:3)

    by XSportSeeker ( 4641865 ) on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @06:20PM (#53241613)

    I wasn't on Slashdot when all the hyperloop craze started and died, so I guess I'll just post the question I posted at multiple blogs and communities back at the time:
    Why are people so hyped about this? Why? What's the point?

    The whole thing is unpractical, unproven, dependant on technology that does not exist, and it's barely bettter at some aspects to existing technology while being so incredibly worse in several other aspects that I don't even know how this whole thing even started and didn't end up as a Simpson's monorail joke to be long forgotten.

    And tech blogs and magazines keep bringing this up every now and then. It was completely ridiculous the level of hype for this on blogs like Gizmodo and several big tech publications. Tech reporters specially seem so fascinated by the whole ridiculous idea that I always feel that I must me missing something. But up to this point, no one explained it to me, so there you go.

    For the original hyperloop concept you'd need a near vacuum tube running all of it's extention as well as some braking mechanism that has not been divised just yet, closer to how pneumatic tubes for mail worked in the past.
    The project has now been adapted to use maglev technology (by some of the companies developing it), but the near vacuum tube is still in research.

    The tech can only work in an efficient way to traverse very long stretches of flat land without any interruptions. You need to reach theoretical top speeds for it to make sense over other ideas.

    In almost all proposed scenarios I've seen to date it just makes way more sense to just adopt any of the currently available maglev train technology... japanese, chinese, european, doesn't matter. The tech is ready, it works well, it's efficient and proven.
    So, why the heck are so many people putting money and attention to research into something that even at the best scenario, will have several disadvantages over Maglev, and will be far more limited than it? Wouldn't it be far better to use all this money to fund the construction of a maglev rail in the US or wherever?

    I've heard all sorts of justifications so far, but none of them made any sense to me just yet.

    Oh, for maglev you need to have uninterruptible flat land which generates lots of land disputes and whatnot. How the f* is hyperloop any better? It also needs tracks just the same, even more, it needs tracks that have to be powered in regular intervals to keep the semi-vacuum state, and the tracks have to be enclosed. It's far worse than MagLev. From the projects I've seen so far, it's a transparent vacuum tube suspended by concrete towers that generates semi-vacuum somehow... wind power with windmills, or solar power, both highly unlikely. It cannot possibly be cheaper to build a suspended transparent robust vacuum tube over concrete pilons in comparison to plain maglev tracks over land. Unless aliens do it. I guess not having to build train stations cheapens the deal, but obviously, this is a flaw, not an advantage. A maglev train that goes from point A to point B without stops would still be cheaper.

    It could get faster than MagLev. Sure, this is theoretical, but also at the huge disadvantage of not being able to have several stops, and being limited to the size of whatever diameter the tubes will have. And then there's the matter of acceleration and desceleration. If you are using maglev tracks anyways for hyperloop, it'll just be the same. If it's a vacuum tube alone, it'd depend on the braking system, but my guess would be that you'd still need a good distant to both accelerate and descelerate in a way that is comfortable for people, which kinda defeats the purpose.

    It could be great for cargo! Still doesn't make sense. MagLev would probably also be better for cargo, being able to make stops and not being limited to an enclosed space.

    I just.... I just don't know. I can imagine there is some advantage to it, but not enough to justify adopting any other readily available technology.

    • Re:I have to ask... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by twotacocombo ( 1529393 ) on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @06:44PM (#53241781)

      The whole thing is unpractical, unproven, dependant on technology that does not exist

      Sounds an awful lot like the manned spaced flight program. Should we have just stuck to flapping our arms and staring longingly at the moon as well?

      • no, we had a rocket program in early 1950s first that became space program in 1958 then a decade later a moon landing.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by x0ra ( 1249540 )
        How many people have been flying to space, and at which cost ?
        • It's not so much the number of people we've sent up there, but the huge number of scientific and technological advances we've made because of our efforts to get there. Human spaceflight is obviously not comparable in every day utility to hyperloop, but if we had the "It's too hard/expensive, why bother" mindset, look at all the things we'd be missing. Even if hyperloop flops spectacularly, we're bound to learn something along the way that benefits humanity somehow.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Posting AC since I modded you up. Add to these problems the fact that if a tube breaks vacuum for any reason a shockwave of air will move through the tube and collide with any trains around causing them to suddenly decelerate. The outcome might not be pretty. Add to that the cost and complexity inherent to vacuum systems. Even for vacuum chambers which don't kill people when they fail, upkeep is expensive, difficult, and they often fail anyway. I'm pretty sure nobody is saying the concept won't work. I'm no

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dbIII ( 701233 )

      Why are people so hyped about this? Why? What's the point?

      It's the future! And the 19th century.
      Weird isn't it. Pneumatic tube transport is coming back after a long break since about 1864.

      MagLev would probably also be better

      I agree. A bullet train from 1968 would probably also be better, let alone a current one or something in development.

    • The whole thing is unpractical, unproven, dependant on technology that does not exist, and it's barely bettter at some aspects to existing technology
      Hu? Making a vacuum tube is technology that dos not exist? Having a mag lev train is technology that does not exist?

      In what middle age do you live?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by olau ( 314197 )

      It seems to me that you are not actually asking a question, but merely stating your opinion (or perhaps just venting), but anyway:

      It sounds like you didn't read the original paper. It answers some of your questions so read it instead of speculating. The tubes were not supposed to be transparent, but made of run of the mill steel. The concrete pylons are there to enable the project to be erected in connection with existing infrastructure, to save on land cost.

      As for the upsides: the hyperloop design was inte

  • ... because of the neccessary accelleration to reach a velocity of more than 1000 km per hour or 277,7777 m per second. The accelleration must be high enough to reach the speed on the distance - and the neccessary time. I would recommend a two phase travel where both phases are timed equally. The first phase is for acceleration - the second phase to deceleration. You have to accelerate for 360 seconds. By doing so you travelled a mere 80km. That makes an acceleration of nearly an eighth g or 1,2 m per squar

  • Someone get this man some Ritalin (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I'm going to retire on Mars - Hyperloop - Wait do you want to launch on SpaceX? - I'm going to colonize Mars - Hey check out my electric car! - I'm going to build a Hyperloop! - I'm looking for people to go to Mars - Hey check out my rockets! - It's an autopilot but it's not really auto - SpaceX! - I'm going to build a Hyperloop - check out my latest CGI - I'm going to retire on Mars - Hyperloop - Wait do you want to launch on SpaceX? - I'm going to colonize Mars - Hey check out my electric car! - I'm going

  • for anyone looking to off load an adorable kitten in 12 minutes. Used to be you had to send them by mail. (mad props to anyone who gets the joke).
  • Okay folks; this seems to be interesting, overpriced, impractical, unproven, consumptive of slave labour, questionable profit/loss, etc.

    But they missed the important question. Will the darn thing have bicycle racks so you can bring you bikes on board?????

    The MAX in Portland and WTA here in Bellingham have racks/hooks for bicycles.

    Perhaps if this is successful, the next one could be from Seattle to Vancouver with stops in Everett, and Bellingham, also with bicycle access? I ride my bicycle from home he

  • Can it scale up? (Score:3)

    by k6mfw ( 1182893 ) on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @07:22PM (#53241945)
    Sounds feasible in a place where extreme wealthy people can build winter village on top of a skyscraper in the desert and have lots of snazzy business jets. However, can hyperloop scale up to move lots of people like high speed rail in Europe and Japan? Decades ago SST was going to be the primary transport but it never could scale up like subsonic transport. Latest Boeing and Airbus transports don't go any higher or faster than the 707 and DC-8 though much better and safer airplanes.

    • I don't know that this is at all feasible, but mostly because building the track is so expensive. Once you have the tube in place, early estimates say each tube should have about the same carrying capacity per hour as two freeway lanes. Because each pod makes the trip so quickly, each pod would make many more trips per hour than one automobile would.

      Two freeway lanes is roughly what you'd want for capacity- you're replacing the long-haul express lane, not carrying the people who only want to travel 5 or

  • Hasn't this garbage been debunked?

  • >> vision for the future of mobility

    Vision for the future of nobility - FTFY. You heard it here first: there will be a special "Presidential" car and a second car for the rest of the royal families.
  • The numbers regarding the physics have already been done and they show the whole hyperloop concept is pure fantasy.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

  • Comment removed (Score:3)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @10:22PM (#53242477)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • The biggest problem is the requirement to maintain a 1/1000th-atmosphere near-vacuum for a tube length of hundreds or thousands of kilometers, where any failure of the vacuum will kill everyone in the tube at the time [youtube.com]. Any terrorist can kill hundreds of people and shut down expensive infrastructure just by shooting a hole in the tube.
  • But good news for Garfield!
  • Curso NR 10 online [institutosc.com.br] curso NR 10 curso NR 10 online

Slashdot Top Deals

Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.

Close