The top speed recorded is 288 mph and hasn’t been beaten in 3 years. This isn’t even faster than the fastest train at 374 mph which doesn’t need vacuum tubes. Considering that hyperloop is just a fast train in a vacuum to make it go even faster, you’d expect it to at least beat trains after 10 years of work. So you tell me.
I think it’s supposed to be more efficient, not just fast. I worked with a guy who helped design Maglev trains for China. With my limited knowledge, I’d think that a train floating above a track with no friction and being propelled by a magnetic wave has more potential that a train in a tube. I’m not familiar with the power and technology it takes to create that magnetic wave, but I still think it has more potential. I should have asked how the wave was created, but I was too amazed that the technology even existed.
Idk, I think any argument that hyperloop is more energy efficient goes out the window when you consider the energy costs of having to keep depressurized a 500 mile long tube.
The top speed recorded is 288 mph and hasn’t been beaten in 3 years. This isn’t even faster than the fastest train at 374 mph which doesn’t need vacuum tubes. Considering that hyperloop is just a fast train in a vacuum to make it go even faster, you’d expect it to at least beat trains after 10 years of work. So you tell me.
I think it’s supposed to be more efficient, not just fast. I worked with a guy who helped design Maglev trains for China. With my limited knowledge, I’d think that a train floating above a track with no friction and being propelled by a magnetic wave has more potential that a train in a tube. I’m not familiar with the power and technology it takes to create that magnetic wave, but I still think it has more potential. I should have asked how the wave was created, but I was too amazed that the technology even existed.
Idk, I think any argument that hyperloop is more energy efficient goes out the window when you consider the energy costs of having to keep depressurized a 500 mile long tube.