Hyperloop One Rebrands as “Virgin Hyperloop One”

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Following an investment by billionaire British investor and entrepreneur Richard Branson, Hypleroop One is rebranding itself as Virgin Hyperloop One: the company’s focus is on a passenger and mixed-use cargo service. They raised $85 million in new funding last month, and that includes the investment from Virgin. Branson refused to provide numbers.

Breaking ground on a commercial hyperloop in two to four years is possible if "governments move quickly," Branson said in a "Squawk Box" interview. So far, no government has approved a plan for a hyperloop system. The Virgin founder also said that building a hyperloop tube above or below ground is "cheaper" and "faster" than a traditional rail network. "As a train owner, " Branson said, "I felt this is something that I want to be able to operate. At the moment our trains are limited to 125 miles an hour." His sprawling Virgin Group empire includes a train network in the U.K., as well as airlines and a business to take tourists into space.
 
>building a hyperloop tube above or below ground is "cheaper" and "faster" than a traditional rail network

for some reason that line is not passing the sniff test

i have never seen any tunneling being cheaper then on ground building
 
I guess if you build a trench, insert prebuilt tube sections and then bury it, it would be less expensive than tunneling.

It is interesting Branson is getting involved, not many things he does flop completely.
 
katanaD said:
>building a hyperloop tube above or below ground is "cheaper" and "faster" than a traditional rail network

for some reason that line is not passing the sniff test

i have never seen any tunneling being cheaper then on ground building
Click to expand...

I think it means cheaper comparatively since the a underground tunnel for a traditional train would be far larger than an underground hyperloop tunnel and therefore cost more and slower to build.
 
1. It's faster because the drag is reduced massively by the vacuuming.
2. I'm not yet sure how it's cheaper, but it might be cheaper in the maintenance regard since it is contained. But I would like to know more on this part too.

IMO, if Branson is significantly involved, he probably sees something awesome, that we don't yet see.

katanaD said:
>building a hyperloop tube above or below ground is "cheaper" and "faster" than a traditional rail network

for some reason that line is not passing the sniff test

i have never seen any tunneling being cheaper then on ground building
Click to expand...
 
When you build a railway track from A to B on the surface you need to buy each and every square foot of land those tracks will cross, that alone is very expensive and can delay the construction for decades, as seen at my place with an Autobahn. One guy didnt sell, a farmer, and it took the state 25+ years to get it in court. If you dig below a certain depth all you need is the allowance of the state to do it and no one can say" STOP, this is my land". That alone makes it very attractive to dig a tunnel without coming to the surface too often but for maint. facilities every few miles etc.. IMHO.

Branson is a smart guy, he sees what most others wont even see in the brightest light I guess.
 
Also think about the logistics of building over land ... and all of the eminent domain issues ... drilling a tunnel would probably cheaper once all is said and done.
 
BitMaster said:
When you build a railway track from A to B on the surface you need to buy each and every square foot of land those tracks will cross, that alone is very expensive and can delay the construction for decades, as seen at my place with an Autobahn. One guy didnt sell, a farmer, and it took the state 25+ years to get it in court. If you dig below a certain depth all you need is the allowance of the state to do it and no one can say" STOP, this is my land". That alone makes it very attractive to dig a tunnel without coming to the surface too often but for maint. facilities every few miles etc.. IMHO.

Branson is a smart guy, he sees what most others wont even see in the brightest light I guess.
Click to expand...

Google how much and how long it takes to tunnel underground, there is no way in he'll it's cheaper than above ground.
 
FearTheCow said:
Google how much and how long it takes to tunnel underground, there is no way in he'll it's cheaper than above ground.
Click to expand...
Translation for those who don't get it:
It is cheaper to build a hyperloop above ground then train tracks above ground. It is cheaper to build a hyperloop below ground then train tracks below ground.
 
FearTheCow said:
Google how much and how long it takes to tunnel underground, there is no way in he'll it's cheaper than above ground.
Click to expand...


Have a think how long it would take to get permission to put a rail above ground across the UK and having to get permission from all the hundreds of farmers, landowners, inquiries for wanting to go though areas of natural beauty, crown land, MOD land, National parks, crossing major motorways, housing estates, sites of scientific interest....

And that could/would be just in one 100-150 mile stretch!

The HS2 high speed rail link from London to Birmingham has cost hundreds of £millions in just paperwork, studies, legal wrangles and inquiries

https://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2017/apr/28/what-is-hs2-and-how-much-will-it-cost

It will be quicker and cheaper to tunnel in the long run. Time is money.
 
Anytime an entrepreneur can convince other entrepreneurs to give up some cash, you are probably on to something. When that entrepreneur is Branson, you can probably take that bet to the bank.
 
The reason its cheaper, I assume, is because above ground you have buildings in the way...lots of buy, tear down and renovate. Can you imagine building a train above ground across nyc? It seems easier to just pick a depth and bore across aimlessly. I know it's more complicated than that but that's how I picture it.

Yea, already covered 2 posts up. My bad.
 
It costs 10x as much to build a tunnel than to build something on the surface. But of course your feelings say that hyperloop is the future and it's so green, and so good, but in reality it failed to justify it's existence until now. It's baffling to see that they haven't done a full scale test track yet. The measly rustbucket they built took hours to reduce the air pressure in, and in the end the test pods that were not even capable of carrying a single person not to mention thousands as needed by a commuter rail line, haven't shown any benefit from being run in a thinner atmosphere. Well most of them failed to run on their own power at all.

The now defunct german maglev project ran for years, with a full scale 10km loop, it achieved the speeds it was advertised to do, and in the end it still ended up in the scrapper. Yet hyperloop didn't produce any results until now end everyone takes it as it is bulletproof technology and it's guaranteed to work as advertised. Hyper freaking solar railroads, that's what this is.
 
BloodyIron said:
IMO, if Branson is significantly involved, he probably sees something awesome, that we don't yet see.
Click to expand...

Just because Branson is interested, doesn't mean he knows what he's doing.

http://www.businessinsider.com/rich...ines-have-fared-as-well-as-virgin-atlantic-11

The key to Branson's success has been getting other people to believe in whatever the fuck he's selling. Even if it's a smoldering pile of cow dung.

He keeps getting repeat customers because he's a smooth talker.

He sold most of his worthless interests to other idiots for many times what they were worth. And for some reason the Virgin brand is still hot enough to give him kickbacks, even after all these years of failed new brand launches.

https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/10/19/how-richard-branson-built-a-5-billi.aspx

If Branson were purely flying off his own intelligence, he'd be worth at most a hundred million today. But because he's surrounded by people with more money than sense, he's worth 5 billion.
 
defaultluser said:
Just because Branson is interested, doesn't mean he knows what he's doing.

http://www.businessinsider.com/rich...ines-have-fared-as-well-as-virgin-atlantic-11

The key to Branson's success has been getting other people to believe in whatever the fuck he's selling. Even if it's a smoldering pile of cow dung.

He keeps getting repeat customers because he's a smooth talker.

He sold most of his worthless interests to other idiots for three times what they were worth. And for some reason the Virgin brand is still hot enough to give him kickbacks, even after all these years of failed new brand launches.

https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/10/19/how-richard-branson-built-a-5-billi.aspx
Click to expand...

Everyone wants a virgin...
 
When it might take a decade to do the studies required to just approve the addition of one lane to a stretch of freeway 60 miles long (in a largely unpopulated area)... I can see why tunneling underground might make a LOT of sense. Probably could be servicing customers for years before any work begins on the freeway :p

//edit - actually, not correct. Looks like maybe 6-6 years until completion (including construction) if all goes well. so.. *shrugs*
 
Last edited:
LMT MFA said:
Elon wants to have a word with you.
Click to expand...

I believe the man can get small jobs done much cheaper, but the big tunneling jobs (Hyperloop) require just as much capital investment. You really can't skimp on the massive diamond-tipped digging heads this requires, and you go through them at the same rate as anyone else.
 
Last edited:
Guess they are assuming the Musk Tunneling Company tech works out. Even underground tunnels have to comply with building foundations, mineral rights and such. A wind farm in OK is having trouble getting permits to dig the holes for the foundations because the local Tribe doesn't want the turbines and by treaty, they own all the mineral rights.
 
defaultluser said:
I believe the man can get small jobs done much cheaper, but the big tunneling jobs (Hyperloop) require just as much capital investment. You really can't skimp on the massive diamond-tipped digging heads this requires, and you go through them at the same rate as anyone else.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure he talked about this a little while ago, any savings are huge, especially compared to buying land.
 
defaultluser said:
Just because Branson is interested, doesn't mean he knows what he's doing.

http://www.businessinsider.com/rich...ines-have-fared-as-well-as-virgin-atlantic-11

The key to Branson's success has been getting other people to believe in whatever the fuck he's selling. Even if it's a smoldering pile of cow dung.

He keeps getting repeat customers because he's a smooth talker.

He sold most of his worthless interests to other idiots for many times what they were worth. And for some reason the Virgin brand is still hot enough to give him kickbacks, even after all these years of failed new brand launches.

https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/10/19/how-richard-branson-built-a-5-billi.aspx

If Branson were purely flying off his own intelligence, he'd be worth at most a hundred million today. But because he's surrounded by people with more money than sense, he's worth 5 billion.
Click to expand...



>They raised $85 million in new funding last month, and that includes the investment from Virgin. Branson refused to provide numbers

so.. he has managed to get others to cough up money. like you outlined
 
Making the tube can be cheap, it can all be all the same pieces.. wrap that sucker in plastic for air tightness.
Tunneling might be cheap, depending on the soil, doesn't seem it needs that big of a tunnel.
So yeah, this could work.
 
Cost isn't really the issue. There is just no way you can put huge lengths of tracks for a new route across a densely populated country like the UK.

Imagine Oregon with a population of 66 million.

You either fly or you tunnel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top