Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation

Elon Musk Says He'll Start Digging a Tunnel From SpaceX HQ Next Month (techcrunch.com) 288

It appears Elon Musk is really serious about digging a tunnel to fix the traffic jams on roads. Last month, the SpaceX CEO sent out a string of tweets complaining about traffic. He suggested that a possible solution might be to start a tunnel-digging firm called -- wait for it -- The Boring Company, following it up by saying "I am actually going to do this," and updating his bio to read: "Tesla, SpaceX, Tunnels & OpenAI." This morning, he repeated the claim, and even assured a questioner that he was, in fact, serious. From a report on TechCrunch: Musk's tunnel plans, then, seem possibly aimed at reducing his travel time between SpaceX and LAX, at least initially. LAX is an airport he likely frequents with dizzying regularity, given his commitments at SpaceX, Tesla and SolarCity. [...] It's hard to gauge Musk's seriousness on Twitter, given his ability to come with fairly dry and playful responses. But he has insisted the tunnel plans were serious previously, and so far, nothing to indicate he's just joking has emerged. Here, too, he responded to a query from a fan wondering if he was serious with a simple "Yup," and he does include "Tunnels" as a list item of his concerns in his Twitter biography.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Elon Musk Says He'll Start Digging a Tunnel From SpaceX HQ Next Month

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    The Hawthorne airport (Jack Northrup Field) is right next to SpaceX.

    • by demonlapin ( 527802 ) on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @12:25PM (#53735995) Homepage Journal
      Runway is too short for jets there. He could helicopter over, but helicopters are risky ways to get around.
      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Runway is too short for jets there. He could helicopter over, but helicopters are risky ways to get around.

        Yes, it seems 75% of helicopter flights end in disaster.

      • Extend the runway. gotta be cheaper than tunnels to LAX

      • Hawthorne airfield is 1511 meters.

        His Gulfstream G650 requires about 2000 meters in full load to take off, but can land in less than one km.

        Dassault Falcon 7X needs 1750 meters to take off in full load, and can land in less than one km.

        So Hawthorne airfield is not enough for G650, but Dassault Falcon 7X with tanks filled only to half could propably takeoff from Hawthorne,
        and could still fly to anywhere in North America, only when flying to other continents it would have to be refuelled.

    • I'm surprised that he hasn't built a flying car.

      Also, I was disappointed to hear that he is "digging" a tunnel. I was hoping that he was planning to build a quantum entanglement warp transporter tunnel to beam himself back and forth to the airport.

  • Like those in a tunnel would be any better.

  • Wrong solution (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @11:49AM (#53735633)

    He is trying to build a better buggy whip. The solution to traffic congestion is not more infrastructure capacity, but using the capacity we have more efficiently. Automatic braking, lane control and (eventually) SDCs, should be able to increase road capacity by a factor of 2 to 5. As the CEO of Tesla, he should focus on that. By the time the tunnel is built, it will no longer be needed.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      We'll need these tunnels to hide from the AI that controls hunter killer modified SDCs in 2056.

    • Re:Wrong solution (Score:5, Insightful)

      by religionofpeas ( 4511805 ) on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @12:03PM (#53735765)
      The closer a road operates to maximum theoretical capacity, the more dramatic the traffic congestion when something goes slightly wrong.
    • He is trying to build a better buggy whip. The solution to traffic congestion is not more infrastructure capacity, but using the capacity we have more efficiently. Automatic braking, lane control and (eventually) SDCs, should be able to increase road capacity by a factor of 2 to 5. As the CEO of Tesla, he should focus on that. By the time the tunnel is built, it will no longer be needed.

      I've no idea if Musk is serious, I'm pretty certain that digging a tunnel under a city requires a ton of permits and months/years of public consultation that don't seem to have happened, but if he were serious I wonder if he's thinking about a private tunnel for just the rich.

      There's a lot of obscenely rich people in LA who don't want so spend hours in LA traffic, and private choppers have a lot of limitations.

      So make a smaller scale tunnel that costs $10k/month, it doesn't fix the traffic problem but it al

      • by religionofpeas ( 4511805 ) on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @12:52PM (#53736283)
        The obvious solution is to dig only under your own property. Any two pieces of property can be connected by digging straight down from both of them until the tunnels intersect.
        • The obvious solution is to dig only under your own property. Any two pieces of property can be connected by digging straight down from both of them until the tunnels intersect.

          They conveniently intersect at his secret underground volcanic lair...

          • The obvious solution is to dig only under your own property. Any two pieces of property can be connected by digging straight down from both of them until the tunnels intersect.

            They conveniently intersect at his secret underground volcanic lair...

            No, Magma lair...

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

      • Re:Wrong solution (Score:5, Insightful)

        by rahvin112 ( 446269 ) on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @02:34PM (#53737253)

        More roads don't fix congestion, they make it worse. California is a good example of this. All more road capacity does is encourage urban sprawl and more traffic, more miles driven and some huge societal costs. There is no easy or good solution to the problem from this point of view.

        You can extract more capacity out of your roadways by increasing the density and speed of vehicles, but to do that you need computers in charge of cars that can drive at 90mph while 6 inches or less from the bumpers in front and behind that communicate with each other and essentially act as a mass transit system. This is a future we will likely see.

        • The solution is easy but so radical, nobody would ever do it: stop making workplaces so far from places where people live. The problem is, jobs are rarely where the people want live. So we need to look at what IS a job and what IS where someone lives and find ways blend them in a way that affects neither work life nor home life.

          Allowing remote working solves the issue immediately but it's not compatible with many workplaces.
          Breaking up huge offices into multiple smaller ones spread around shows promise.

    • by arth1 ( 260657 )

      He is trying to build a better buggy whip. The solution to traffic congestion is not more infrastructure capacity, but using the capacity we have more efficiently. Automatic braking, lane control and (eventually) SDCs, should be able to increase road capacity by a factor of 2 to 5. As the CEO of Tesla, he should focus on that. By the time the tunnel is built, it will no longer be needed.

      No, that's not the solution to traffic congestion.
      Another is to reduce the need for transportation.
      Reward decentralization - bring traffic into the equation when deciding to close a post office or police station, and give proportional tax breaks to branch offices that reduce how much people have to travel.
      Stop welcoming large malls that cause people to drive longer distances, whether it's to work there or shop.
      Encourage broadband, where electrons flow, not people.
      Create incentives for local production and w

    • Certain routes have too much congestion, especially in LA where there are far too many surface intersections. Software optimization only gets you so far. You really need bypass tunnels/bridges for through traffic, and limit the surface lights to turning traffic. From SpaceX, getting under the 105 and a few miles north would help. So would a bridge to the Green Line metro.
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • As the CEO of Tesla, he should focus on that

      I think they already are focusing on that.

    • Automatic braking, lane control and (eventually) SDCs, should be able to increase road capacity by a factor of 2 to 5. As the CEO of Tesla, he should focus on that.

      Has anyone on earth led to more practical results [tesla.com] in those areas than Elon Musk?

    • Might be a good place to upgrade to a vac tube though

    • He is trying to build a better buggy whip. The solution to traffic congestion is not more infrastructure capacity, but using the capacity we have more efficiently.

      I think you misunderstand. On Mars, tunnels will be the efficient infrastructure that will need to be built anyway.

  • "LAX is an airport he likely frequents with dizzying regularity, given his commitments at SpaceX, Tesla and SolarCity"

    Since he flies his own jet, I expect he doesn't fly out of LAX.

    • Re:Probably not LAX (Score:4, Interesting)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 ) <slashdot@worf.ERDOSnet minus math_god> on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @12:26PM (#53736015)

      "LAX is an airport he likely frequents with dizzying regularity, given his commitments at SpaceX, Tesla and SolarCity"

      Since he flies his own jet, I expect he doesn't fly out of LAX.

      Why not? LAX services business jets as well - they usually have a separate entrance and separate terminal building too.

      He doesn't fly commercial jets like most people going to LAX, but he certainly would use the private jet terminal. And yes, they have standard security as well, but since fewer people use the terminal, there's no lineup and they usually will be able to go from the car to the jet in about 5 minutes.

      • Re:Probably not LAX (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Zak3056 ( 69287 ) on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @01:22PM (#53736581) Journal

        And yes, they have standard security as well, but since fewer people use the terminal, there's no lineup and they usually will be able to go from the car to the jet in about 5 minutes.

        Not familiar with the GA terminal at LAX, but I'd be stunned if they had "standard security" as most have what you would call "no security." I remember one FBO that had a keypad lock on the gate to the barbed wire topped chain link fence, and a sign above the keypad that had the code neatly engraved upon it (and yes, this is post 9/11--that's why the fence had barbed wire and a lock).

        The simple truth is that the feds cannot and do not dictate what you bring on board on your own personal airplane. I once wore a glock on my belt while piloting a C172 just for the sheer novelty of doing so, and did not break any laws by so doing.

        • by rahvin112 ( 446269 ) on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @02:20PM (#53737137)

          If you wore said glock while over a state that forbids open carry you probably violated the law. Though pretty much impossible to be enforced it still constituted one of your 3 felonies a day.

        • by tlhIngan ( 30335 ) <slashdot@worf.ERDOSnet minus math_god> on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @03:17PM (#53737677)

          Not familiar with the GA terminal at LAX, but I'd be stunned if they had "standard security" as most have what you would call "no security." I remember one FBO that had a keypad lock on the gate to the barbed wire topped chain link fence, and a sign above the keypad that had the code neatly engraved upon it (and yes, this is post 9/11--that's why the fence had barbed wire and a lock).

          The simple truth is that the feds cannot and do not dictate what you bring on board on your own personal airplane. I once wore a glock on my belt while piloting a C172 just for the sheer novelty of doing so, and did not break any laws by so doing.

          This is true for most GA airports. But LAX also services commercial airplanes, so anyone on the air side of the airport will have to have gone through security screening.

          Otherwise it's a Very Big Security Hole at LAX. Because you can always just use the GA terminal to get full access to the airfield and the restricted parts of the airport. (It's all connected to the same runways and all that, and if you're willing to walk a bit, you can end up at the regular terminal as well. Or just take one of the many carts).

          So no, commercial airports will demand their GA terminal have standard security screenings. Regular GA-only airports usually don't have much more than a security door, and most cases the FBO will just have two doors - one from the outside into the FBO, one from the FBO to the field.

  • Of course Musk isn't going to start digging tunnels next month. I can scarcely begin to imagine how much work it involves to get permission, permits, acquire land, and the million-and-one other things you have to do before even breaking the sod.

    What's gone wrong with this website? Someone please fix it.

    • Exactly. Unfortunately this is Slashdot, where we fellate Elon Musk at every possible opportunity, even when his so-called plans are clearly so absurd as to be an obvious joke.

      It's a shame. This used to be a site for nerds; now it's a site for mouth-breathing morons to act breathless about the companies, products and figureheads that they personally idol-worship.
    • Just dig deep enough, and you'll end up below the permit depth.
      • There is no permit depth. Depending on the state laws involved if you tunnel off your property you need permission from the property owner (in the west you might not even have permission to tunnel on your own property because someone else owns the mineral rights). If this is in a public ROW (Right-of-way) you need permission from the government in charge who is going to require that this be a public service (no private tunnels) and that you provide access for public utilities and other things as part of you

    • I can scarcely begin to imagine how much work it involves to get permission, permits, acquire land, and the million-and-one other things you have to do before even breaking the sod.

      Perhaps he has. Some journalist should file an FoIA request to get a look at the permits, deeds, etc.

    • Of course Musk isn't going to start digging tunnels next month. I can scarcely begin to imagine how much work it involves to get permission, permits, acquire land, and the million-and-one other things you have to do before even breaking the sod.

      What's gone wrong with this website? Someone please fix it.

      The environmental impact studies alone will cost millions and take years, then there are the traffic studies, engineering and as you point out acquisition of the right of way and permits... He is either kidding (my guess), or blowing smoke/steam about LA's traffic problems. He's either not thought this through or he's not serious and given who this guy is, I cannot believe he's serious.

    • SpaceX is at a railroad right-of-way... you could tunnel under and likely be within the railroad's land rights.
    • Of course Musk isn't going to start digging tunnels next month. I can scarcely begin to imagine how much work it involves to get permission, permits, acquire land, and the million-and-one other things you have to do before even breaking the sod.

      The real question is if he will be building his own boring machines. There's already a lot of tunnels being built using boring machines and they are not made in the US. Does he think that he can improve on the machinery like he did rockets and create another company? Tunnels will be important to both hyperloop and Mars colonies. He may just have the idea and people that he can provide that service to his own projects and produce another company out of it.

  • Hyper tunnels. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    First we build a tunnel... then we suck all the air out... then we move people around through a series of tubes.

    • by bobbied ( 2522392 ) on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @12:23PM (#53735981)

      First we build a tunnel... then we suck all the air out... then we move people around through a series of tubes.

      What could go wrong? (gasp)

      • Re:Hyper tunnels. (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @02:02PM (#53736969) Homepage

        What could go wrong? (gasp)

        First we build a thin aluminum can. Then we fly it 10000 meters up where there's no air to breathe and if you stop, you drop. It's not hard to make flying sound like a death trap.

        I imagine if Musk is thinking it he's thinking underground Hyperloop, you have a tube and on the outside you have air supply. Emergency escape routes. Brakes that automatically engage when they lose power. Emergency overrun to physically bring it to a halt. Bad things could still happen of course, but -5g for 5s and you've gone from 900 km/h to zero in 640 meters. It would be like a nasty roller coaster but really the killer is impact. Hit something really hard (no, even at 900km/h air is not really hard) to stop in fractions of a seconds and you're in deep shit.

  • Musk has gone full supervillain.

  • that tunneling through earthquake zones is never cheap nor easy.

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com] Remember the villain from The Incredibles ?
  • He and I just had lunch yesterday. He is joking, but remains mildly annoyed with his commute length. Self driving cars are another solution he has proposed to ease traffic congestion.

    • by starless ( 60879 )

      Self driving cars are another solution he has proposed to ease traffic congestion.

      My suspicion is that self-driving cars will not ease traffic congestion at all, and may make it worse.
      i.e. they won't reduce the number of car trips but could increase them.
      Self-driving cars may reduce parking problems - which could therefore result in the increased car usage/congestion.

  • Is not building roads/bridges/tunnels something, only a government can do? Crazy Libertarians [reason.com] may disagree, but we know, they are wacko [huffingtonpost.com]...

    • by Kagato ( 116051 )

      Yeah.. when Trump says he's going to put a Trillion Dollars into infrastructure he's not going to do it with tax payer dollars. He'll sell the roads to private interests who will use them as toll roads.

  • Do you want Morlocks? Because that's how you get Morlocks.
  • please (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SlashDread ( 38969 ) on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @01:10PM (#53736481)

    please PLEASE run for president next time.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      please PLEASE run for president next time.

      He can't (at least not US President). Elon Musk was born in South Africa to parents from South Africa and Canada.

      In order to be US President, you have to be a "natural born Citizen" of the US. What exactly that means is a bit unclear on some edge cases, but at the very least it means that you have to be eligible for US citizenship at birth - either through being born on US soil, or being born to US citizen parents. Being born in a foreign country to foreign parents doesn't cut it, even if you get US citizen

    • please PLEASE run for president next time.

      Elon Musk cannot be POTUS, as he is not a natural born US citizen.

  • Though they ain't cheap but I think Elon can buy one, or lease. I'm sure these are relatively safe as police and media regularly fly these things around the LA area. I haven't RTFA (who does?). This reminds me an article from Flying magazine in 1970s, "Fastest Way Around Town on the Slowest Thing Flying" about an air service using a Bell 47J (a variation of the famous "MASH" bubble helicopter) that has three passenger seats behind the pilot. This ferrys people between LAX to other spots around the area. Not
  • Talk about the wrong solution. This is Elon Musk we are talking about here. If he has problems getting to and from LAX, then the solution is to NOT go to LAX. Surely purchasing his own private Jet and flying from a more local airfield is an order of magnitude cheaper than digging a tunnel.

  • I can't help but notice that this comes out on the same day (nearly the same moment, in fact) as Trump's "yes I'm serious about the wall" EO (executive order). Even followed up by "we'll begin building the wall within two months." (Musk stated that [they] "Plan to start digging in a month or so") If it is some kind of commentary/joke, I'm not sure I get it... but hey what do I know?
  • by ElizabethGreene ( 1185405 ) on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @02:19PM (#53737135)

    Consider this in light of Mr. Musk's long term goal: Permanent human colonization of Mars.

    The high cosmic radiation on Mars means that Habitats are very likely to be underground. Today, no-one makes a tunnel boring machine that will fit on a rocket: Boring Inc.

    The lack of fossil fuels means you need a big power source: SolarCity and the battery Gigafactory

    Last but not least, you need a way to get there: SpaceX

    He's building the infrastructure to make his goal a reality.

  • But, to be honest, beyond colonizing mars, building electric cars, a solar future, and high-speed, vaccuum tunnels, he is missing the one important part of being a motivated industrialist: storing his urine in jars. I mean, the Spruce Goose flew for sure, but let's face it, Howard Hughes wasn't legendary until he started bottling his urine.

Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather a new wearer of clothes. -- Henry David Thoreau

Working...