Rockin' in the free world since 2005.

[Total: 11    Average: 4.1/5]
26 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 6374
Rating: 4.1
Category: Misc
Date: 06/08/13 03:23 PM

26 Responses to New York To LA In 45 Minutes?

  1. Profile photo of ElectricEye
    ElectricEye Male 40-49
    2723 posts
    June 8, 2013 at 3:25 pm
    Link: New York To LA In 45 Minutes? - ET3 Worldwide tube transportation project. This, looks amazing.
  2. Profile photo of skypirate
    skypirate Male 18-29
    2345 posts
    June 8, 2013 at 3:54 pm
    sounds cool for the shipping industry. screw 3-5 days, i want 3-5 hours.
  3. Profile photo of keith2
    keith2 Male 18-29
    2587 posts
    June 8, 2013 at 4:03 pm
    It`ll never happen.
  4. Profile photo of lukeforv123
    lukeforv123 Male 18-29
    1053 posts
    June 8, 2013 at 4:34 pm
    That would change everything.
  5. Profile photo of SephirothA83
    SephirothA83 Male 18-29
    955 posts
    June 8, 2013 at 4:43 pm
    coming in the year 2237
  6. Profile photo of CreamK
    CreamK Male 40-49
    1423 posts
    June 8, 2013 at 4:50 pm
    Never gonna happen, it`s too efficient.
  7. Profile photo of drawman61
    drawman61 Male 50-59
    7707 posts
    June 8, 2013 at 4:52 pm
    Governments: "Cheaper to run means less profits means less cuts for us. Application denied!"
  8. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    June 8, 2013 at 6:01 pm
    Is this even remotely possible with current technology? Merely making a vacuum thousands of miles long under oceans seems a little ambitious.

    Also, the figures for their pie in the sky seem quite wrong. A sporty road car can`t accelerate at 4g. Not even close. An F1 car can accelerate at ~1.5g and they`re pretty extreme. You`d need a top fuel dragster to get 4g acceleration. On top of that, a sustained acceleration of 1g is uncomfortable and 3 minutes of it would be necessary to reach 6500Km/h.

    Any flaw would of course result in catastrophic destruction not just of the capsules but of the tubes.

    I think it`s not even close to being viable any time soon. It`s efficient in theory, sure, but so is teleportation.
  9. Profile photo of drips
    drips Male 30-39
    904 posts
    June 8, 2013 at 6:13 pm
    Wow! A fully CGI presentation with no explanation of technical or financial considerations?!? Seems legit.
  10. Profile photo of carmium
    carmium Female 50-59
    6381 posts
    June 8, 2013 at 6:27 pm
    Unfeasible schemes like this pop up fairly regularly. Thanks for the reality check, Angilion.
  11. Profile photo of handimanner
    handimanner Male 60-69
    2095 posts
    June 8, 2013 at 8:48 pm
    and it sucks the lint right out of your navel at the same time.
  12. Profile photo of AvatarJohn
    AvatarJohn Male 30-39
    1059 posts
    June 8, 2013 at 9:34 pm
    Of course this would work! I saw it on Futurama! And at my local bank (on a much smaller scale).
  13. Profile photo of SavageChef
    SavageChef Female 50-59
    2692 posts
    June 9, 2013 at 12:37 am
    Okay, if when this thing crashes, we would all die, as opposed to being gravely injured and disabled, then, okay. Otherwise, pass.
  14. Profile photo of Nickel2
    Nickel2 Male 50-59
    5879 posts
    June 9, 2013 at 1:03 am
    Early trials took place in 1864, Crystal Palace pneumatic railway:

  15. Profile photo of 10Bears
    10Bears Male 30-39
    441 posts
    June 9, 2013 at 1:39 am
    So you take a tube thousands of miles long, and somehow suck all the air out of it without it collapsing. Yeh, that sounds feasible.
  16. Profile photo of CreamK
    CreamK Male 40-49
    1423 posts
    June 9, 2013 at 2:42 am
    "Also, the figures for their pie in the sky seem quite wrong. A sporty road car can`t accelerate at 4g. Not even close. An F1 car can accelerate at ~1.5g and they`re pretty extreme. You`d need a top fuel dragster to get 4g acceleration. On top of that, a sustained acceleration of 1g is uncomfortable and 3 minutes of it would be necessary to reach 6500Km/h. "

    I`m betting it`s the braking, ie deceleration not acceleration. F1 canadian GP starts in few hours, in the hairpin brake they are doing over 5G. So does a normal car, deceleration is ~1g easily.

    Constant acceleration of 1G is not uncomfortable. It`s literally the same as you pop your seat down to 45 degree angle.
  17. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    June 9, 2013 at 9:10 am
    Bugatti Veyron from 0 to 100 km/h in 2.4 s, has g force = 1.18 g

    Bugatti Veyron from 100 to 0 km/h in 2.3 s, has g force = 1.3 g, with an additional 0.6 g support by the rear spoiler.

    So, a sporty car (the sportiest) comes nowhere close to 4g.

    I got those figures from Bugatti,
    and from this website which was quite informative. It also says Top Fuel drag racing world record of 4.4 s over 1/4 mile, g force = 4.2 g
  18. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    June 9, 2013 at 10:11 am
    Okay, if when this thing crashes, we would all die, as opposed to being gravely injured and disabled, then, okay. Otherwise, pass.

    If you crash a vehicle that`s essential a train carriage into anything solid with an impact speed of 6500 Km/h, you`d need a lot of careful DNA analysis to seperate the bits of whoever was inside because all the passengers are going to be smashed to paste and mixed together into a very small space.

  19. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    June 9, 2013 at 10:12 am
    For comparison, below is a video of a 700 mph collision between a light rocket sled and a car against a wall. Note that this is *far* less force than one of these trains crashing would be - the velocity is 6 times less and the mass is much less. 0.5mv^2, so this crash would have 1/36th of the force even if the masses where the same and they aren`t - the backstop in this video moved a lot more than an underground tunnel would do and the sled is probably much lighter than a train capsule. I`d be surprised if the force in this collision is as much as 1% of the force of one of these capsules crashing.

    Mythbusters crash a car
  20. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    June 9, 2013 at 10:16 am
    Constant acceleration of 1G is not uncomfortable. It`s literally the same as you pop your seat down to 45 degree angle.

    Bugger, I was wrong. I was adding 1g to the 1g from gravity and therefore thinking about a force that is actually 2g. Which, as you point out, is wrong.

    Although...wouldn`t you need to be flat on your back to get 1g acting from your front to your back, not at 45 degrees?
  21. Profile photo of lukeforv123
    lukeforv123 Male 18-29
    1053 posts
    June 9, 2013 at 11:32 am
    I love the ass-bags talking about "if this thing crashes." Ever been on an airplane?
  22. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    June 9, 2013 at 11:47 am
    I love the ass-bags talking about "if this thing crashes." Ever been on an airplane?

    Ever been on a maglev train travelling at 6500 Km/h inside a narrow tunnel?

    Comparing two very different situations is rarely a good argument.
  23. Profile photo of fancythat
    fancythat Male 30-39
    1950 posts
    June 9, 2013 at 7:41 pm
    Sure, but can you fit a fat Mississippi queen in it?
  24. Profile photo of MrAtari
    MrAtari Male 40-49
    1562 posts
    June 10, 2013 at 3:12 am
    @fancythat: yes you can, but it will slow the train down by about 20 MpH (per queen)
  25. Profile photo of Musuko42
    Musuko42 Male 18-29
    2850 posts
    June 10, 2013 at 5:32 am
    This is a dream of the future from the previous age. Telecommunications (primarily, the internet) reduced much of the need for high-speed travel.

    I suspect what need that does remain is unlikely to be large enough to fund such an expensive venture.
  26. Profile photo of liabach
    liabach Male 40-49
    3242 posts
    June 10, 2013 at 10:16 pm
    I love ass-bags unconditionally.

Leave a Reply