Uncategorized

Is Hyperloop Dead?

Wondering if Hyperloop is dead or want to know recent facts about Hyperloop? It’s time for an exciting update! As we step into a new era of technological advancements, the way we travel is evolving. One company at the forefront of a transport revolution is Hardt Hyperloop, a Dutch start-up that is redefining the concept of convenience, speed and efficiency in transportation. Hardt Hyperloop is developing a super-fast tube transport network technology, a concept that will transform the way we commute in the future.

Recent Facts about hyperloop

Summary

Despite the economic challenges posed by rising interest rates and high inflation, Hardt Hyperloop has shown remarkable resilience. The company recently raised €12 million in growth capital from investors, demonstrating the confidence the market has in their innovative vision. This capital will be instrumental in their plans to open a test center in Veendam, Groningen next year.

Recent Developments

In the face of rising interest rates and high inflation, Hardt Hyperloop has demonstrated its resilience and strategic prowess. The company recently secured €12 million in growth capital from a mix of public and private investors. This successful capital raise is a testament to the confidence and trust that investors have in Hardt Hyperloop’s vision and capabilities.

These funds will play a crucial role in the company’s ambitious plans. One of the key projects on the horizon is the opening of a test center in Veendam, Groningen. This center is set to become a hub for innovation and development, bringing the company’s vision of a super-fast tube train closer to reality.

While other start-ups have faced financial difficulties, Hardt Hyperloop continues to forge ahead. The company’s ability to secure funding in a challenging economic climate sets it apart and underscores its potential to revolutionize transportation.

The Vision

Hardt Hyperloop is not just about creating a faster mode of transport; it’s about reimagining the future of transportation. The company envisions a world where distances become irrelevant, and travel is as efficient as it is fast. The hyperloop, a tube network capable of reaching speeds of up to 700 mph, is central to this vision. Higher speeds are possible with the current change in the design since Musk’s original idea of using low air pressure and fans has been scrapped.

But the company’s vision extends beyond speed. The hyperloop is designed to float on magnetic levitation (maglev), reducing friction and making the journey smoother and more comfortable for passengers. This floating pod inside the tube is not just a concept; it’s a step closer to reality with the planned opening of the test center in Veendam.

Hardt Hyperloop’s vision is a long-term one. The company hopes that by 2050, there will be a network of hyperloop tubes across Europe, connecting cities and countries with unprecedented speed and efficiency. As co-founder Tim Houter often says, “Luckily I’m still young.”

With the latest round of capital, the company believes it can continue its progress until the middle of next year. This confidence, coupled with the support of investors who understand the long-term nature of the project, keeps Hardt Hyperloop on track to realize its vision.

Challenges and Criticisms

Like any groundbreaking innovation, the hyperloop concept has faced its share of criticism. Critics have raised concerns about the cost and energy efficiency of the vacuum travel environment hyperloop tubes. There are also practical challenges associated with laying a hyperloop route, which must be straight through the landscape.

One persistent myth is that a hyperloop can only transport three loads per hour. However, Hardt Hyperloop’s co-founders, Tim Houter and Mars Geuze, have refuted this claim. According to Geuze, technically, a pod inside a tube (not a train) can shoot through the landscape every 10 to 15 seconds, significantly increasing its transport capacity.

This is allowed by an elegant switching mechanism that allows a travel pod to route and be switched along the travel pathway until it reaches it’s preset destination. Travel then becomes seamless from beginning to end with no stops, no traffic snarls, not changing at terminals or stations. Getting away from the “train” and terminal concept is the key game changer that makes Hyperloop transport technology so attractive and compelling.

Despite these criticisms and challenges, Houter and Geuze remain undeterred. They continue to passionately defend their dream project, providing well-reasoned responses to critics and demonstrating their unwavering commitment to making the Hyperloop a reality.

Future Plans

Hardt Hyperloop’s future plans are as ambitious as they are exciting. The company is eagerly looking forward to next spring when it can start using the test tube in Veendam. The European Hyperloop Center, located there, will not only serve Hardt Hyperloop but also offer space to other interested hyperloop companies, fostering a collaborative environment for innovation.

The test tube in Veendam is a critical component of Hardt Hyperloop’s plans. It will demonstrate the hyperloop’s ability to change lanes and float past a station, distinguishing it from traditional trains. This feature allows the hyperloop to stop less frequently than a train, increasing its efficiency.

Hardt Hyperloop is also in discussions with various parties for future hyperloop projects. One of the most concrete discussions is with Saudi Arabia, which is considering building a hyperloop at The Line, a futuristic city planned in the desert. While the Gulf states are potential markets, Hardt Hyperloop’s co-founders emphasize their European roots and their commitment to ensuring that Europe has the best transport system.

The European Commission has shown interest in the hyperloop concept and included it in its mobility vision for the future. This recognition gives Hardt Hyperloop hope for building the pilot route in the Netherlands, possibly in Rotterdam, their hometown. The city council of Rotterdam has already passed a motion in support of a hyperloop and is investigating how it can be integrated with the city’s existing public transport.

Conclusion

Hardt Hyperloop stands at the intersection of innovation and ambition, driving forward a vision that could redefine the future of transportation. Despite the challenges and criticisms, the company continues to make strides towards its goal, backed by a strong team, supportive investors, and a resilient spirit.

The company’s plans for the test center in Veendam and the ongoing discussions with various parties for future hyperloop projects underscore the progress being made. With the European Commission’s interest in the hyperloop concept and the support from the city council of Rotterdam, Hardt Hyperloop’s dream of a network of hyperloop tubes across Europe seems increasingly achievable.

As we look towards a future where distances become irrelevant and travel is as efficient as it is fast, Hardt Hyperloop is undoubtedly a company to watch. Its journey is a testament to the power of innovation and the potential of human ingenuity to create a better, more connected world.

Hardt Hyperloop Update Courtesy: fd.nl

Previous Article: Comparing Hyperloop and ET3 Efforts and The Tech Behind Each

Introduction to Hyperloop Technology

What is Hyperloop?

Hyperloop is a proposed mode of passenger and freight transportation, first patented by ET3s Daryl Oster in 1999 as evacuated tube transportation technology – then later introduced by Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceX and Tesla, Inc in August 2013. It’s a sealed system of tubes through which a pod may travel free of air resistance or friction, conveying people or objects at high speed while being very efficient, thereby drastically reducing travel times.

The Concept and Working of Hyperloop

The concept of Hyperloop technology originally involved a low-pressure transit tube system in which pressurized capsules ride on an air cushion driven by linear induction motors and air compressors. It is designed to be a faster, cheaper, safer, and more sustainable alternative to other modes of transportation. It’s also energy agnostic and receives energy produced from any source. Although, the main idea and thrust is to utilize renewable – sustainable energy sources. Later designs have fallen in line with ET3 – using linear motors and maglev.

ET3 design takes it even further with a proposed design using a higher vacuum rate, meaning lower pressure than its counterparts. Lower pressure simply means lower resistance and with ET3, it’s a near-space environment, the oldest and most proven travel environment in the known universe. No company today is incorporating Musk’s pipe dream design incorporating compressors or air suspension technology. Those are all atmospheric – the very thing a tube transport system’s design is supposed to be eliminating.

ET3 Global Alliance

Overview of ET3:

ET3 Global Alliance, short for Evacuated Tube Transport Technologies, is an American company that has proposed a transportation system using car-sized cargo and passenger capsules traveling in evacuated tubes on frictionless magnetic levitation (maglev) at speeds up to 4000 mph. The company claims that ET3 could provide 50 times more transportation per kWh than electric cars or trains.

Technology and Innovation at ET3

ET3’s approach to transportation is unique. It combines the technologies of maglev trains and vacuum tubes to create a system that can theoretically reach speeds of up to 4,000 mph. The capsules are designed to carry six people or a similar amount of cargo, and the entire system is automated, reducing the potential for human error.

Hyperloop One (Virgin/Hyperloop One)

Overview of Hyperloop One

Hyperloop One, previously known as Virgin Hyperloop since Richard Branson’s Virgin Group invested in the company then exited, is an American transportation technology company that works on the high-speed technology concept called Hyperloop. The company successfully conducted a full-scale Hyperloop test in May 2017, reaching speeds of up to 240 mph.

Technology and Innovation at Hyperloop One

Virgin Hyperloop is pioneering the technology and the regulatory framework for the deployment of Hyperloop systems around the world. Their system uses linear accelerator electric propulsion to accelerate a passenger or cargo vehicle through a tube in a low-pressure environment. Autonomous vehicles levitate slightly above the track and glide at faster-than-airline speeds over long distances, due to ultra-low aerodynamic drag.

Hardt Hyperloop

Overview of Hardt Hyperloop

Hardt Hyperloop is a Dutch company that aims to develop the Hyperloop high-speed transportation system. Founded in 2016, Hardt Hyperloop emerged from the winning team of the SpaceX Hyperloop Pod Competition. The company is currently working on a European Hyperloop network, with a focus on integrating the system within the existing transportation modalities.

Technology and Innovation at Hardt Hyperloop

Hardt Hyperloop’s technology is based on the use of magnetic levitation in a low-pressure environment to achieve high speeds with low energy consumption. The company is also working on the development of lane-switching technology, which would allow the Hyperloop system to create a network of tubes, much like a highway system, rather than a point-to-point connection.

Hardt Hyperloop Update 7/21/2023

Hyperloop Transportation Technologies (Hyperloop TT)

Overview of Hyperloop TT

Hyperloop Transportation Technologies, also known as HyperloopTT, is an American research company that uses a crowd collaboration approach to develop a commercial transportation system based on the Hyperloop concept. The company was founded in 2013 and has made significant strides in developing the technology and infrastructure needed for a functional Hyperloop system. More recently, the company has struggled with what appears to be limited funding sources. The company was recently procured for its supposed so-called “valuable” patent portfolio.

Technology and Innovation at Hyperloop TT

HyperloopTT is known for its unique approach to innovation, leveraging a global team of contributors working in exchange for future equity. The company’s technology includes a passive magnetic levitation system called Inductrack, which uses permanent magnets to achieve levitation, reducing the need for power and increasing safety. HyperloopTT is also developing a full-scale passenger capsule and has signed agreements for feasibility studies and potential Hyperloop systems in several countries around the world.

The obvious drawback to the Hyperloop TT design would be its sheer size. Original concepts, artwork and designs suggest the company plans to move cargo as large as 40′ shipping containers. There’s much to consider with this approach as the size of tubes and infrastructure required to support such a network are astronomical and unfeasible. Hyperloop TT will never fly when a train can perform the same task with a similar cost – and trains for freight are already in place and function well.

Comparing ET3, Hyperloop One, Hardt Hyperloop, and Hyperloop TT

Speed and Efficiency

All four companies aim to drastically reduce travel times compared to current modes of transportation. ET3 stands out with a proposed top speed of 6500 km/h or 4000 mph, while Hyperloop One, Hardt Hyperloop, and Hyperloop TT aim for speeds around 1200 km/h. In terms of efficiency, all companies use magnetic levitation, which reduces friction and energy consumption.

ET3 extends efficiency even further and is able to achieve higher speed: creating a lower vacuum state – more like space. The lower vacuum environment allows ET3 capsules to glide along the travel path on the frictionless maglev using no additional energy after a capsule has accelerated. In addition, ET3 uses less energy than its Hyperloop counterparts – when capsules reach their desired destination, 90% of the energy used to accelerate is recaptured.

Until recently, ET3 was the only design that would integrate switching into the tube network, but now, both Hardt and Hyperloop One have adopted and are planning as well.

Safety Measures

Safety is a top priority for all four companies. They all propose using low-pressure tubes to reduce air resistance and potential damage from external conditions. The use of magnetic levitation also eliminates many of the risks associated with mechanical parts. HyperloopTT has additionally developed a proprietary passive magnetic levitation system called Inductrack, which they claim increases safety.

ET3 approach to maglev is HTSM or High Temperature Superconductor Magnets – maglev is recharged before the beginning of each travel and no additional energy is required until the capsule reaches its final destination.

Cost and Feasibility

The cost of building a Hyperloop system is high, but the exact amount varies depending on the specific route, terrain, and other factors. All four companies are working on feasibility studies and partnerships with governments and other organizations to make their visions a reality. HyperloopTT and Hardt Hyperloop have made significant progress in Europe, while Hyperloop One has conducted successful tests in the United States.

Although it’s extremely difficult to estimate construction costs, especially with something so new and untried like tube transportation systems; Daryl Oster – whose first patents for ET3 were awarded in 1999, estimates a backbone network beginning in New York and ending in London via the Bering Strait – Suggests an approximate cost of $2Trillion USD as of 2021.

Oster, also eludes that size matters significantly when constructing a tube network and that larger concepts proposed by Hyperloop designs will cost significantly more to build. In addition, the higher tube enviroment pressure precludes Hyperloop designs to the 5X lower speeds than ET3, not to mention, lowers efficiency as energy is constantly required to move capsules along due to added resistance of slight atmospheric conditions.

Conclusion

The Hyperloop concept represents a significant leap forward in transportation technology. While ET3, Hyperloop One, Hardt Hyperloop, and Hyperloop TT each have their unique approaches and innovations, they all share a common goal: to revolutionize the way we travel. As these companies continue to develop and refine their technologies, the dream of high-speed, efficient, and sustainable travel is becoming closer to reality.

When it comes to regional and intercity travel, Hyperloop will be a winner no doubt with its estimated top speed exceeding 600 mph. ET3 claims their 4000 mph design would reduce to as low as 350 mph for local travel but the design would theoretically allow the higher end assuming the travel path was straight enough. All the designs are subject to physical forces created through curves, climbs, and descent and would have to adjust capsule speed accordingly.

FAQs

Note: The term “Hyperloop” is applied as defining tube transportation which also includes ET3.

1. 1. What is the Hyperloop?
      The Hyperloop is a proposed mode of transportation that involves a sealed system of tubes through which a pod may travel free of air resistance or friction, conveying people or objects at high speed.

1. 1. How fast can a Hyperloop go?
      The proposed speeds vary by company, but they range from around 1200 km/h for Hyperloop One, Hardt Hyperloop, and Hyperloop TT, to up to 6500 km/h for ET3. For perspective, using switched tube network, capsules travel from origination point to destination seamlessly without stopping, you get in the capsule, it enters the lock where atmosphere is evacuated while you program your destination. The capsule moves into the network, then accelerates at 1 g force until reaching 4000 mph then merges into the flow of tube traffic. You’re on your way to Tokyo and will arrive in less than an hour and a half. Is that convenient and fast enough? No terminals, no transfers, no waiting… just get in and go.

1. 1. Is Hyperloop travel safe?
      Safety is a top priority for all Hyperloop companies. They propose using low-pressure tubes to reduce air resistance and potential damage from external conditions, and magnetic levitation to eliminate many of the risks associated with mechanical parts. Also, by creating a travel path that’s completely controlled, all the designs eliminate any possibility of that pathway being disrupted or obstructed.

1. 1. How much does it cost to build a Hyperloop?
      The cost varies depending on the specific route, terrain, and other factors. All four companies are working on feasibility studies and partnerships to make their visions a reality. (See the above ET3 estimate.)

1. 1. When will the Hyperloop be available?
      It’s hard to say exactly when the Hyperloop will be available for public use, as it depends on many factors including technological developments, regulatory approvals, and construction timelines. However, all four companies are making significant progress in developing the necessary technology and infrastructure.

Also of note: ET3 has had a significant head start over its Hyperloop counterparts and as a result, has been ready for the next phases before Elon Musk ever thought about Hyperloop. In fact, he invited Daryl Oster and the ET3 group to Space-X in the summer of 2013 before releasing his Hyperloop Alpha document and announcing the idea via most major news networks. At that time, the technical folks at Space-X who design the rockets and such suggested to Elon that ET3 is a far more advanced and elegant design than his original Hyperloop idea. They suggested he write a check to ET3 then and there to fund the ET3 effort.

To date, The Hyperloop One/Virgin effort being the first to build and test an evacuated tube environment project – abandoned most of the Hyperloop Alpha concept leaving a tube, capsule with the redesign looking a lot more like ET3. Unfortnately, that effort to date cost investors and the rest of us 10 years to date and over $200 Million USD. Somebody needs to ask why. Today, we could have been and should already be building out these networks and the $200 Million would have gone a long way toward that effort.

It’s an important question to ask ourselves – how do we want to travel in the future? Do we want it to cost like bus fare, but get you there in record time and convenience? When listening to people like Musk, it becomes clear that Hyperloop was never an effort he was going to pursue, but instead, looking at the Hyperloop Alpha document, it becomes clear that his mind’s dreams were always going to be in the skies flying in rockets and fast planes. For him, Hyperloop was a means of sandbagging efforts already underway that would undermine his dreams of flying. 

Further yet, it’s still amazing that there’s mention trains, vac trains, hsr or high speed rail and such in the same breath while speaking about Hyperloop technology. Ironically as well, it’s also interesting to note that Hyperloop was always intended to be a subsonic travel technology – not hypersonic as its name tries to convey. The only known design that’s hypersonic potential is ET3.

PDF Hyperloop Facts (Click Here)

In the realm of futuristic transportation, the concept of the Hyperloop has stirred a revolution, promising a paradigm shift in how we view and experience travel. The brainchild of entrepreneur Elon Musk, the Hyperloop is more than just a high-speed transit system – it is a vision of a world where distance and time no longer pose barriers to human connectivity and economic growth. Yet, as we delve deeper into this world of near-supersonic speeds and cutting-edge technology, an essential question emerges: What should the Hyperloop’s vehicles, or ‘capsules’, look like?

This article embarks on a journey through the evolving landscape of Hyperloop design, focusing on the size and structure of these capsules. We will explore how different companies have interpreted and expanded upon Musk’s initial concept, as we delve into the approaches of Hyperloop One, Evacuated Tube Transport Technologies (ET3), and Hyperloop Transportation Technologies (HyperloopTT).

Along the way, we will make a compelling case for a future where Hyperloop capsules are small and packet-like, marking a departure from the conventional notion of large passenger vehicles. Strap in as we accelerate into the future of transportation.

The Original Hyperloop Concept: A Leap Toward Subsonic Tube Travel

While Elon Musk popularized the term “Hyperloop,” it’s essential to note that the initial conceptual groundwork for tube transportation was laid by Daryl Oster. His visionary idea of transporting passengers and goods in tubes at remarkable speeds sparked the imaginations of engineers and entrepreneurs worldwide.

Elon Musk’s Hyperloop concept, as detailed in his 2013 alpha-design white paper, was a bold step forward in this field. It envisioned a high-speed transit system where passengers or cargo would be transported in capsules or “pods.” These pods would travel through low-pressure tubes, propelled with linear electric motors while levitated via onboard fans. The design aimed to achieve silent, turbulence-free travel at speeds of up to 760 mph, making it a subsonic mode of transportation. The original Alpha design required a low pressure environment, not a vacuum.

Musk’s capsules were envisaged to be large, aiming to accommodate about 28 passengers at a time, much like a traditional train or subway car. However, the large capsule design has sparked a debate. Would it be more efficient and cost-effective to build smaller, packet-like capsules? Hyperloop One and other efforts have come to that conclusion.

When we consider the Hyperloop’s ambitious speed and efficiency targets, smaller capsules emerge as an intriguing proposition. The smaller the capsules, the lower the infrastructure costs, as less material would be required for tube construction. Furthermore, smaller capsules could potentially reduce the energy needed for propulsion and increase the system’s overall efficiency.

As we turn to the adaptations and iterations of Musk’s original Hyperloop concept, we see a fascinating diversity in capsule design and strategy. Let’s take a closer look at how companies like Hyperloop One, ET3, and HyperloopTT have interpreted and expanded upon the original vision for tube transportation.

Hyperloop One: From Passenger Travel to Freight

Among the various companies striving to make tube travel a reality, Hyperloop One, known from 2017 to 2022 as Virgin Hyperloop, has emerged as a significant player. Founded in 2014, this American transportation technology company has committed itself to the commercialization of the Hyperloop concept, though not without making some notable changes to the original vision.

Hyperloop One’s technical adaptations have led to a variation of the vacuum train concept. They have managed to design systems intended to move cargo at speeds comparable to airlines, but at a fraction of the cost. These systems operate with capsules suspended by magnetic systems in vacuum tubes, embodying Musk’s original concept of air-bearing levitated pods but with some strategic shifts.

A pivotal change was Hyperloop One’s decision to transition its focus from passenger travel to freight. This strategic shift was accompanied by a reconsideration of the size and design of their capsules. While passenger capsules would need to be large enough to accommodate humans comfortably, cargo capsules could be smaller and more akin to packets. This shift towards smaller, packet-like capsules has the potential to enhance the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the system significantly.

However, the journey towards commercial operations, which Hyperloop One aims to launch by 2030, has not been without its challenges. After more than 400 uncrewed tests and the first human trial conducted at a speed of 107 mph, the company decided to abandon plans for human-rated travel in February 2022. The decision led to a significant reduction in workforce and a reversion to the company’s original name, Hyperloop One, after parting ways with the Virgin branding. Despite these hurdles, Hyperloop One’s journey underscores the evolving nature of Hyperloop technology and the importance of flexibility and innovation in realizing this ambitious concept.

HyperloopTT – Transportation Technologies: Size Matters

Another noteworthy player in the Hyperloop saga is Hyperloop Transportation Technologies (HyperloopTT). This company has embraced the original Hyperloop vision, but it’s their approach to capsule design that merits our attention, particularly in the context of our discussion on capsule size.

HyperloopTT has proposed large passenger capsules that seem to align with the original vision of Musk. Their designs showcase spacious capsules that prioritize passenger comfort and seek to provide an immersive travel experience. However, these larger capsules, while attractive in their passenger-centric design, come with a set of challenges that warrant further exploration.

The larger the capsule, the larger the tube needs to be to accommodate it. This requirement could lead to significant increases in infrastructure costs due to the increased materials needed for tube construction. Additionally, larger capsules could potentially consume more energy for propulsion, impacting the system’s overall efficiency.

This raises the question: While large capsules may offer an enhanced passenger experience, are they the most efficient and cost-effective solution for the Hyperloop system? As we look to the future of Hyperloop technology, the importance of balancing passenger comfort with system efficiency and affordability becomes increasingly apparent. This delicate balance forms the crux of the debate on capsule size, and it’s here that we see the case for smaller, packet-like capsules gain strength.

ET3: Hypersonic Speeds and the Case for Smaller Capsules

When discussing the evolution of tube transportation and the debate around capsule size, it is crucial to mention Evacuated Tube Transport Technologies (ET3). Founded by Daryl Oster, who we’ve acknowledged as the original brainchild behind the concept of tube transportation, ET3 has been a significant force in advocating for smaller, packet-like capsules.

ET3’s vision diverges significantly from the large capsule design proposed by companies like HyperloopTT. The company’s design involves small capsules, capable of carrying up to six people or an equivalent amount of cargo. These smaller capsules are designed to travel in tubes with a significantly smaller diameter than those proposed for larger capsules. This design choice aligns with the principle we’ve been exploring – smaller capsules could lead to more cost-effective infrastructure due to the reduced size of the tubes.

But the innovation of ET3 doesn’t stop with capsule size. The company has also pushed the boundaries of speed. While Hyperloop concepts are subsonic, aiming for speeds around 760 mph, ET3 envisions a hypersonic model with an estimated top speed of 4000 mph. This leap in speed is another domain where the smaller capsule design of ET3 could have an advantage – smaller capsules could potentially manage high speeds more effectively.

By embodying the principles of smaller, packet-like capsules and hypersonic speeds, ET3 illuminates a path that others in the field, such as Hyperloop One, have begun to follow. It demonstrates that the original concept, as conceived by Oster, remains a guiding force in the evolution of tube transportation technology. Hyperloop One’s latest vision also includes ET3 capsule and tube switched network for seamless travel from beginning to end. Switching and smaller – hypersonic speed capsules are the real game changer when considering intercontinental travel. How quickly can you get from San Francisco to Tokyo at 4000 Mph? Think about it…

In conclusion, while the journey towards operational tube transportation systems is still ongoing, the discourse around capsule size is an essential facet of these technological advances. The strategic choices made by companies like Hyperloop One, HyperloopTT, and ET3 will significantly influence the future of tube transportation. Whether the industry will lean towards larger, passenger-centric capsules or smaller, packet-like capsules remains to be seen. However, the smaller capsule design, as initially proposed by ET3 and now followed by others, presents compelling advantages that cannot be ignored.

The Future of Tube Transportation: A Shift Towards Smaller Capsules?

As we look forward to the future of tube transportation, we can’t ignore the potential shift towards smaller, packet-like capsules as popularized by ET3 and now also adopted by Hyperloop One. This shift could revolutionize the industry, paving the way for a more cost-effective and efficient approach to high-speed tube transport.

The implications of this shift are profound. For one, the adoption of smaller capsules could reduce construction costs dramatically due to the decreased size of the tubes. This could make tube transportation an even more attractive alternative for mass transit, increasing its viability and potential for widespread adoption.

Moreover, smaller capsules could also enhance the system’s efficiency. By reducing the energy requirements for propulsion and the infrastructure necessary for larger capsules, smaller capsules could make tube transportation more sustainable in the long run. This would align with global efforts to reduce carbon emissions and promote green transportation solutions.

However, challenges remain. Ensuring passenger comfort in smaller capsules is one significant hurdle. Reconciling the need for efficiency with the requirement for a comfortable passenger experience will be a critical balancing act for companies in the tube transportation industry. That said, the innovations and technological advances we’ve seen so far give us reason to be optimistic.

In conclusion, while there are still many unknowns in the world of tube transportation, one thing is clear: the debate around capsule size will continue to shape the future of this industry. Whether we’ll see a world where smaller capsules dominate the Hyperloop system or a blend of small and large capsule designs, the discourse around capsule size, as spearheaded by companies like ET3, Hyperloop One, and HyperloopTT, will undoubtedly continue to be a key driver of innovation in this space.

Conclusion: The Capsule Size Debate Continues

In the realm of tube transportation, the debate on capsule size continues to be a driving force for innovation. The original concept of smaller, packet-like capsules, introduced by Daryl Oster and ET3, has provided a compelling alternative to the larger capsules proposed by companies like HyperloopTT. Companies like Hyperloop One have since adopted this concept, showcasing the potential benefits of smaller capsules, such as lower construction costs and improved efficiency.

However, the larger capsule design isn’t without its merits. It offers increased capacity, which could be a significant advantage for mass transit systems, and a potentially more comfortable experience for passengers. The challenge for companies pursuing this design will be to reduce costs and increase efficiency while maintaining these benefits.

It’s clear that the choice of capsule size isn’t just a technical decision—it’s a strategic one that reflects each company’s vision for the future of tube transportation. Will we see a one-size-fits-all approach, or will the industry diversify, with different companies specializing in different capsule sizes? The answer will undoubtedly shape the future of high-speed tube transport.

As we continue to monitor the evolution of this exciting field, we can look forward to new technological breakthroughs, innovative design solutions, and, most importantly, the continued push towards making tube transportation a reality. Regardless of the outcome of the capsule size debate, one thing is clear: the quest for efficient, high-speed tube transportation continues, driven by the innovative spirit of companies like ET3, Hyperloop One, and HyperloopTT. The journey may be long, but the destination—a world connected by high-speed tube transport—promises to be well worth the wait. Similar article

When a Project Lacks Proper Due Diligence and Sound Vision:

The big idea behind an effective HET3 – ET3-Hyperloop design is to create something new, something innovative and highly effective… something much faster, safer and substancially more convenient.

Today, air travel is the best thing we have to move people and ship things around our globe at the highest speed… but, planes have to move through the atmosphere – we’re still moving at sub-sonic speed. The promise of the future is traveling in a space environment within an evacuated tube that will go beyond supersonic allowing hypersonic travel on earth. This is and should be our future…

In contrast, air travel – not to mention, the entire system of terminals where planes have to gate for boarding and un-boarding is outdated. In addition, air travel for passengers has become bogged down so much that getting from point A to B takes a lot longer while more stops are added along the travel path that requires more boarding and un-boarding – passengers have to do all that switching between gates then wait during long layovers for their next flight where they’ll board once again. These measures have been implemented in order to extract greater profits toward sustainable airline businesses.

A tedious and outdated system that wastes a lot of valuable time. Also, air for moving freight is inefficient due to high cost, not to mention the carbon footprint effect. But it is the most convenient at this time for getting smaller shipments from point A to B in the most time-efficient manner.

Ground transport in some respects is a different story. Today, for freight, we use rail technology to move larger loads with greater efficiency.

Continue here from LinkedIn article: There’s a reason Berkshire Hathaway has invested heavily in railroads, because they still work and, they continue being a foundational workhorse. On the passenger – rail transport side though, there’s still the element of changing lines at designated terminals where we switch from one line to another that eventually gets us to our desired destination.

The only thing that’s changed most over time is rail’s propulsion technology from steam to electric and diesel. Only problem with rail transport is the slowness. Same goes for maritime shipping. Did you know that maritime shipping is even more energy efficient than rail and that canal barge beats all?  Good stuff for heavy load lifting for sure as long as you can plan ahead and have the time to wait. Weather also plays a potential disruptive factor.

There have been some advancements in the rail transport arena though. For example – the use of magnetic levitation for high speed passenger trains increases efficiency via friction reduction. Currently, there are 5 high-speed maglev rail systems in Japan, China and South Korea that use linear electric motors for propulsion.

All of these still move through the atmosphere though. There’s been a lot of talk regarding trains moving into evacuated environments or Vactrains. But the idea, like a whale-sized Hyperloop such as Hyperloop TTs concept is completely impractical and cost-ineffective. The infrastructure needed to support such systems requires far too much material to construct.

To date, the companies that have created the latest rail tech with the objective of increasing speed and efficiency are always looking to improve those elements further. Also, there’s consideration for using alternative power sources and hybrid designs. But reality suggests any further advancements will only extract slight incremental gains. Although it can be pleasurable to travel by train as a passenger, it’s too unsustainable a method that can’t serve near enough people en masse.

The issue is the sheer mass of the infrastructure required to carry the weight of the transport vehicle combined with the load it carries. With rail – this element hasn’t changed since its inception. In addition, moving rail cars carrying freight at any higher speeds will most likely increase accidents. This is what draws attention to the Hyperloop TT concept, mass and weight. It already takes the average freight train moving at 55 Mph one mile to stop. Accidents continue to happen. The original idea presented by Elon Musk wasn’t about a Hyperloop train. More like a bus it seems.

One note for consideration regarding market encroachment concerns of both rail and maritime entities – when it comes to a potential/perceived threat of ET3-Hyperloop tech facilitating their displacement. If current air freight or trucking methods aren’t a concern, then why would a tube transportation solution become any more of a threat? The larger bread and butter heavy loads will still remain on ships and trains as they should.

Our focus subject today is Hyperloop TT (H-TT). Specifically, the focus is on the extremely large size of H-TT’s Hyperloop train like capsules and the very large tubes they would need to move through. Rather than focus on the extreme infrastructure cost of design and buildout, let’s focus on the simple fact that there’s another way to move things around that would normally go inside containers or rail cars. (Forbes Hyperloop Article image and link)

H-TT’s vision is to move large containers inside their massive capsules as a method of moving large shipments from point A to B. It’s important to acknowledge and understand that any tube transport project shouldn’t be designed and built to accommodate outdated shipping and logistics methods. The point is, we’ve already got enough well developed technologies to accommodate those large loads. Trains for the longer leg and trucks for last mile.

Why would anyone want to build an elaborate network of tubes, then move entire containers full of goods inside of them? Is it possible that there’s another way and approach that’s far more efficient and convenient that automates much of the shipping and logistics that are still being used today via trains, trucks, and delivery vans?

The greater question would have to be: what’s a better way that improves shipping and logistics on all levels?

As mentioned, we already have a well-developed shipping and logistics system in place. What technology could be applied in a way that would improve upon the current models? How could an ET3-Hyperloop design using mag lev and electric linear propulsion inside a vacuum improve the scenario in myriad ways that help achieve sustainability goals and objectives – while getting some of the smaller packetized loads to their respective destinations efficiently and cost-effectively?

What design would work best and why? Why would Hyperloop TT’s massive train sized capsule be a misguided approach that will be a costly mistake? This isn’t a pick on H-TT day, it’s just a reality check on vision gone askew that’s not based on reality and our needs going forward. The vision only reflects what we already do today with the added element of moving similar activities inside a vacuum environment. Not necessary for larger payloads.

The answer lies within a smaller design such as ET3’s use of inexpensive maglev tech and linear electric motors to accelerate small pod capsules in a vacuum environment. This idea isn’t new though… Daryl Oster, the inventor of ET3 has been dreaming of the idea and has been at this since childhood. The vacuum environment idea came about while wind tunnel testing at Walla Walla University in the U.S. state of Washington.

The first patent was awarded to ET3 by the USPTO in 1999. That’s 14 years before the Hyperloop-Alpha document was released and about 16 from the time of filing. It’s fair to say that Daryl has spent a lot of time conceiving and developing what appears to be a superior concept in so many ways. So much so that to date, both Virgin Hyperloop One and Hardt are beginning to present ideas that mirror the basic concepts of ET3. Virgin’s efforts have been exhilarating to witness and learn about… and have a development cost to the tune of over $200M USD to date.

That money was spent – first to attempt to prove out, then disprove the Alpha document Hyperloop design idea/concept. Then begin the process of designing and developing a much more efficient and elegant maglev linear motor system that supports a pod in a vacuum state. A move in the right direction at least and more like ET3.

Those are some of the elements of ET3. So much time and money have been wasted. So… getting back to the importance and place tube transport tech will serve and complement existing tech, we’ll now focus on how it will do that and what it can bring to the table. Most importantly, how it will perform transport of freight and people far more efficiently and intelligently.

It’s no secret that automation, AI, autonomous vehicles, and such are in the news every day. We’re absolutely moving in that general direction and things are only going to move that way more quickly as time moves forward. This is where technologies like ET3 shine due to the foundational nature of how the system has been designed to function.

ET3 for example uses smaller size pods that would resemble a small van in cargo space to give an idea of size, say carry up to 3 pallets of cargo. Alternatively, think of a small SUV that can carry up to 6 passengers for that side of things. It also uses automation intelligence for routing capsules.

Either way, the cargo capacity will be at 800-900 Lbs per capsule. The method of routing these pods through the network of tubes allows each pod can be addressed for a set destination. Once addressed, the pod begins its travel path – switching along the way until it exits at the final destination where it slows down with energy-recapturing technology. (reverse linear electric effect) ET3 estimates the maximum pod speed could reach 4000 Mph.

The advantages of shipping smaller loads (think packetized like internet packets) via pod will be extreme efficiency. Greater speed, and smaller loads will allow separate pods to be sent to various destinations that get product close to final delivery at 90% efficiency. From there, trucking – container-sized shipments or smaller vans can move things shorter distances to their final destination. This approach will save energy, reduce CO2 and lower cost of delivery significantly.

The idea of moving large containers through tubes doesn’t make sense when shipments of product can be sent from various global destinations in smaller packetized pods where those shipments can then be aggregated at the last mile delivery location to then be trucked.

The correct design will change the entire shipping logistics equation that everything needs to be consolidated earlier in the process, then sorted at facilities along the way until things get where they need to be. That process takes a lot of time and energy and the cost is significant. Not to mention, the carbon footprint aspect. Due to the high efficiency rate, maintaining inventories in more real time sustainably will be possible with smaller shipments.

If we’re going to introduce a new 5^th mode transport technology, then why not think it through with a vision that’s in line with the potential 5^th mode promises with the elements of speed, efficiency, and automation add to the mix?

Hyperloop – TT fails at this in every way. They need to go back to the drawing board or consult the people who are already light years ahead of everyone on this concept and have the patents to prove it. Otherwise, their currently active competition is already moving toward smaller pods and tube network infrastructure.

The first call they should be making is to Daryl Oster and ET3 before wasting more time or another dime of investors’ money. Also considering the long term effect of not addressing carbon-releasing activities sooner due to time wasted in ignorance. To date, the Hyperloop TT efforts – any IP that’s been generated has recently been sold off. I’d be curious to learn what those patents are and what value they could bring to the entire effort? Also hoping for the sake of those investors that the patents aren’t specific to the larger design ideas planned by the original H-TT effort.

The biggest issue that’s sandbagged this entire effort of all the players engaged to date, deals with the misleading concept and vision presented by the core design aspect in the Hyperloop-Alpha document. The core promise presented there that I believe got everyone’s attention was the element of open source. Immediately, we as humans seem to go to free as in royalty-free use. I believe that’s been a huge mistake that every Hyperloop project should step back for a moment to consider the broader landscape. Spending >$200 million for R&D to discover what others already know doesn’t indicate much effort toward the importance of due diligence. How much more time and money will be spent as a way of reinventing a wheel that’s already been invented?

Every effort that’s been launched to date has taken and run with Elon Musk’s vision of what a tube transportation system should look and function like… while glancing over his statement regarding ET3 without having a speck of curiosity about what the company is and what they’ve accomplished in terms of concept and vision.

Business and investments in new ideas and ventures typically require deep and well-thought-out due diligence – why has everyone skipped this most critical step while considering such a venture?

The split off of Virgin from their Hyperloop involvement has taken everyone by surprise along with Hyperloop One’s stated intent to abandon the idea of transporting people. They claim they’re only focusing on freight. Is this a permanent strategy or a step back to get the system going with freight first, and passengers later? And why the Virgin exit?

Both situations create more questions than answers but let’s take a look at things and hopefully find some valid perspective. To me at least, the idea of being able to travel at hypersonic speed – a real potential of traveling in a vacuum state – is extremely attractive and a major reason I’d want to switch my long-distance travel mode away from flying. How about you?

Why would anyone want to stop flying? Why travel in a tube environment that’s controlled and in a vacuum? Are there advantages?

The obvious reasons are: Flying is affected by weather. The travel path since it’s in the atmosphere, is subject to whatever the earth’s weather decides it’s going to throw at you. Lightening, storms, wind, rain, clouds, fog… then there’s always the other planes or some foreign object that might enter the flight path. More reasons why are stated below.

Traveling in a vacuum – space is a vacuum for instance and the oldest and most proven form of travel happens in our universe all the time. For example, our Earth home travels around the sun perpetually in a vacuum. It’s able to do that because a vacuum removes all forms of atmosphere. Just like maglev removes rolling resistance, vacuum environments remove travel path resistance by removing any elemental molecules from that environment.

The advantages of a vacuum travel path are multiple. Efficiency increases dramatically – for example, ET3 has calculated that a 90% efficiency rate can be gained in a vacuum.

Speed – a vacuum allows anything within it to travel at much higher speeds without disturbance. No air molecules means an almost unlimited speed potential. The only limiting factors would be the curvature of the earth and gravity’s effect including g forces where tubes have to have curves, go up or downhill. 4000 Mph is the estimated limit assuming radius of curves are no smaller than 250 miles and you want to keep g forces limited to 1 g.

Why maglev and linear motors?

Maglev isn’t a new idea, it’s been applied to six high-speed rail projects. China has three, South Korea – has two and Japan has one. In the case of train technology – maglev reduces rolling component friction by eliminating anything that touches anything else. Wheels and rails touch one another and cause resistance. All the axles and components that support rolling wheels also contribute to rolling resistance.

In the case of trains and Hyperloop-ET3 (HET3), if you use maglev, then you’ve got to use linear motors. What are they? If you’ve ever ridden on a modern-day roller coaster and felt extreme acceleration, then you’ve experienced the power and potential of linear motors. The difference in the application – trains vs HET3 would be the mass and weight. Trains weigh a lot and require a lot of energy to move them and whatever’s inside.

In addition, trains still move through the atmosphere so, will always have speed limitations. HET3 requires a lot less energy to get a capsule going. As, HET3 weighs a lot less and is a new design from the ground up that performs inside a vacuum state, like space – so the application of linear motors can be thoughtfully integrated into this new system while unleashing the greater potential they offer. Travel pods weigh a lot less than trains. An additional advantage with HET3 designs is the ability to recapture energy through regenerative braking. ET3 suggests 90% of the energy used to move a pod can be reclaimed using HTSM maglev.

Why Hypersonic speed – aren’t planes fast enough? What about Hyperloop’s supersonic 750 Mph?

The simple answer would be – get where you’re going a lot faster while spending a lot less time sitting, waiting to get there. How much time do we spend in planes and at airports – waiting? A typical flight to S.E. Asia, Bangkok from West Coast U.S. for instance – usually takes 20 hours in the best circumstances. U.S, domestic flights with layovers, boarding, and un-boarding, unless you can get a direct flight, have moved into the 10+ hour category. If Hyperloop were limited to 750 Mph, you’d probably still get there a lot faster than flying. Speed counts for sure.

Airplane travel at sub-sonic speed is faster than a car or train, but it’s still slow. And, it takes a lot of energy to get a plane to fly and stay flying while reaching cruising altitude and speed. Hyperloop in a vacuum will definitely be faster. It will also be a lot more efficient… it has to be. Current sub-sonic airplane travel is just too slow when newer technology has come along to displace it. Although, stated in the Alpha-Hyperloop document gives a peek inside the minds of aerospace dreamers and thinkers. They’d like to keep us in planes, including Elon Musk. Also, flying at supersonic speed will consume even more energy. It will also require that we briefly head into space, then re-enter at the desired location for landing.

There’s a big problem with all this though… If the technology to fly faster costs more to develop and build, if planes use even more energy than today – we can assume that the cost to fly faster will increase. That’s a big problem in the larger realm – eight billion people now inhabit our planet. How will the idea of supersonic airplanes be able to serve the vast majority of travelers who won’t be able to afford it? The larger argument of staying on course with advanced aviation doesn’t hold up.

Unless you’re creating an industry that serves an exclusive group who can afford it, most passengers won’t be flying supersonic. Also, it’s highly doubtful that airplanes are going to get you there at 4000 Mph… then you’ve got the reality of the terminal system that’s completely broken. It’s antiquated and archaic when comparing today’s current air travel design to HET3 designs such as Virgin Hyperloop, Hardt Hyperloop and ET3 – all utilize switched pods that eliminate layovers and plane transfers. Switching changes everything.

What’s the idea behind pod travel path switching & what’s it do for you?

When the ideas started coming out about a vision of Hyperloop travel and what that would look like, it resembled the traditional airport terminals with the idea of making them more like Singapore with all it has to offer. It’s a nice idea, but… with all technological change and utilizing the right/smartest design, the idea of long layovers and lounging in terminals won’t be necessary. Those pretending to be visionaries were clueless about the power and potential, HET3 will eliminate anything that resembles today’s terminal designs.

The people realized immediately that Elon Musk’s “Hyperloop Train” idea could be actually something, never met Daryl Oster and didn’t research the design elegance of ET3. Elon Musk knew about ET3 though – before he published the Hyperloop-Alpha document, but the publication effectively misguided Hyperloop participants away from ET3s ideas. Research and development efforts have cost a lot of money that has finally led to the discovery of Daryl’s ideas… now everyone is thinking along the lines of ET3. But, it they’re not, they’re complete fools following the wrong lead and it will cost them dearly.

When you get into your car and drive somewhere and want to get there – no frills like, do you want to stop and lounge someplace? Usually, the answer would be no unless you like traveling that way or your journey is a long one. When we travel by car, we do that because it’s most convenient and serves our needs best. It also can save a lot of time vs bus or other scheduled methods that use terminals. Most people’s objective when traveling is to get where they’re going. That’s typically the highest priority.

Essentially, switching eliminates the need for elaborate terminals – with HET3, you won’t be waiting for connections, no long layovers. How that’s accomplished is through switching pods during travel. Each pod has a unique destination. Think of the internet and how information travels to get to your screen. It doesn’t stop along the way and wait for a physical handshake – no one has to carry your request by hand and walk it to the next flight so it gets to you eventually. When you put in your request, within seconds, you’ll get a result.

HET3 works very much the same way, except now we’re switching pods in a physical network. An internet for moving people and things. Except when you get inside a small travel pod that seats up to six people, you program your destination and go. Your journey begins when the pod launches and ends when you get there without stopping. Along the travel route, your pod switches to the appropriate tubes in the network until you get there. It’s seamless and extremely efficient – most convenient like your car, but no traffic and goes a lot faster! No terminals required, only stations large and small for getting in and getting out.