The Future of Hyperloop in the UK

[Adlington]

A report by the Transport Research Laboratory (full title: The Future of Hyperloop in the UK: Cutting through the Hype) has been published.

It starts with a pessimistic/realistic (delete as appropriate) assesment:

Hyperloop has been ambitiously adopted by several companies such as Virgin Hyperloop One and Hyperloop Transportation Technologies (HyperloopTT). TRL's report recognises that although Hyperloop offers several benefits in relation to speed and energy, there are still significant barriers that need to be addressed long before it could become a reality, primarily that the technology remains unproven. The truth of the matter is that Hyperloop for the UK could be at least 20 years away.

But then it states something controversial (in my VERY humble opinion):

In TRL's view, the case for Hyperloop is strongest in terms of freight transport applications. [...] TRL believes that at this stage, moving freight via Hyperloop, has far greater potential than passenger transport.

Am I showing a gross lack of imagination thinking that moving goods by hyperloop is a daft idea?

 

[FtoE]

I suppose a few central depots in obvious places (Dover, London, Birmingham, Manchester, Glasgow) and while the technology is still bedding in (in case anything went catastrophically wrong) it does kind of make sense to me.
For the same reason as it’s better to send robots into space it’s better to have freight travelling at 700mph in a vacuum than humans?

 

[Eagle i-Thrust]

I actually think it's a good idea, it'd be much safer than transporting passengers as there'd be no need for a pressurized "pod" for said passengers and I imagine it'd be cheaper and more cost effective to transport freight than passengers.

 

[MarkyT]

Remember that hyperloop is just a maglev in a tube. It's the vacuum element I have most problems with. For freight you don't need 700mph or anything like that, so the considerable costs and risks of establishing an almost completely empty tube might be avoided. Maglev in Japan and China has already achieved remarkable speed in open air applications and might have some long term benefit for some very fast point to point passenger links, although that's far from being an 'off the shelf' product at the moment, despite being in development for decades. A system of small autonomous freight pods on dedicated guide way and perhaps mostly routed via non evacuated pipes is a most compelling idea however, especially if it can also self load in automated warehouses. There's a UK company promoting such a concept currently and working with Ocado, one the World's leaders in warehouse automation. It has little in common with hype loop thoigh apart from use of tubes. I'll find a link later

 

[whoosh]

Sounds like a reimagined Pneumatic Dispatch Company.

 

[MarkyT]

Here we go:
https://www.magway.com/

 

[MarkyT]

Sounds like a reimagined Pneumatic Dispatch Company.

There's a fundamental difference. Pneumatic systems use pressure difference for propulsion. Hyperloop uses a vacuum to limit air resistance, but other methods for propulsion. Current promoters are proposing linear motors.

 

[Bletchleyite]

High speed goods of that nature is a waste of money and energy, so no, I don't support it.

We already have a national infrastructure capable of doing next day delivery of consumer goods (and same day in some cases) - I don't see a need to speed that up, really.

 

[kristiang85]

I don't think the UK is the right country for Hyperloop - certainly our recent history with big infrastructure projects is lacking, and we just can't prioritise it really when there isn't much of a problem.

The likes of the USA, China, maybe Saudi Arabia, where there is some cash available and big cities needing to be connected more efficiently would be a good starting point for this tech.

 

[cb a1]

High speed goods of that nature is a waste of money and energy, so no, I don't support it.

We already have a national infrastructure capable of doing next day delivery of consumer goods (and same day in some cases) - I don't see a need to speed that up, really.

If it costs more then there wouldn't be a market for it except for possibly some incredibly time sensitive products but those alone wouldn't justify the cost of construction.

I must admit that I've not read the TRL report, but I would expect that it's not the time savings that would primarily make a freight hyperloop viable but the reduction in the human resource costs. In this regard, any backers of such a system would also need to keep an eye on the developments in any autonomous Road and Rail Freight systems.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I must admit that I've not read the TRL report, but I would expect that it's not the time savings that would primarily make a freight hyperloop viable but the reduction in the human resource costs.

Presently a lot of freight requires one driver and signallers etc - and technology is moving along there to reduce that even further.

 

[furnessvale]

Am I showing a gross lack of imagination thinking that moving goods by hyperloop is a daft idea?

Given that both road and rail freight receive a measure of cross subsidy from passenger users of their respective networks, where are the passengers to come from to cross subsidise hyperloop freight?

 

[Jonny]

There main issues derive from friction and vehicle/vessel/craft detection. Low friction reduces the energy required to move an object over a given distance, but makes it harder to avoid collisions (such that gaps are larger or active deceleration is required) and then there is the matter of keeping track of everything that is on the hyperloop. The latter would be much easier to solve for freight. Similar systems are used within shops etc. for small packages. A rough history of previous uses is on wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pneumatic_tube and a summary of the technology is at https://timhowgego.wordpress.com/capsule/what/ .

The main non-financial issue for hyperloop as a passenger-carrying concept is the implementation of a signalling and braking system.

It is also likely to be very expensive to build with the complications required for even a rudimentary level of comfort...

Edit: the nearest at present is this:

 

[edwin_m]

The main non-financial issue for hyperloop as a passenger-carrying concept is the implementation of a signalling and braking system.

I'd say that was do-able if necessary and the major difficulties for passenger use were elsewhere, such as:

It is a pressurised system. Any loss of pressure in the capsule would mean that the tube (not just the capsule) would have to return to near atmospheric pressure within a few seconds or the occupants would be dead. Is it possible to detect this and vent the tube quickly enough and what would be the effect on capsules that would still be moving rapidly.

The capsule is likely to be very close to the tube wall. Any disturbance in either could result in a high speed collision.

To minimise the risk of these events, I believe airport-style security will be essential for anyone using the Hyperloop. This immediately destroys the journey time advantage over conventional rail, at least for most journey lengths within the UK.

 

[GreatAuk]

I sort of see what they're saying in that a freight-only hyperloop wouldn't have the same safety and security concerns that a passenger one would, and some corners could be cut (e.g. turn radius).

However, I am certainly with the OP here - unless there's been some massive advance I'm not aware of, building maglevs is ruinously expensive, and surely maglevs inside a vacuum are even more ruinously expensive. It simply doesn't stack up - I don't believe there's enough time critical freight moving round the UK for it to be worth building this. The main reason you'd build it is to transport passengers, as they have good reasons to want to be places faster. If it's not economically viable to build some kind of narrow gauge freight railway across the UK, then it certainly won't be viable to build a hyperloop.

All in all it's nonsense from my perspective.

 

[AlastairFraser]

I don't think the UK is the right country for Hyperloop - certainly our recent history with big infrastructure projects is lacking, and we just can't prioritise it really when there isn't much of a problem.

The likes of the USA, China, maybe Saudi Arabia, where there is some cash available and big cities needing to be connected more efficiently would be a good starting point for this tech.

I agree, but I can see it being viable over here when the TRL says it will be i.e 20 years later. Despite it's huge cost, it would revolutionise journey times across the UK and destroy the domestic airline industry in a way even High Speed Rail couldn't. It isn't then viable as a freight railway, but with the reduction of passenger traffic on the railways due to the new Hyperloop, it could use the conventional railway so much more.That's why I think HS2 is a white elephant.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree, but I can see it being viable over here when the TRL says it will be i.e 20 years later. Despite it's huge cost, it would revolutionise journey times across the UK and destroy the domestic airline industry in a way even High Speed Rail couldn't. It isn't then viable as a freight railway, but with the reduction of passenger traffic on the railways due to the new Hyperloop, it could use the conventional railway so much more.That's why I think HS2 is a white elephant.

That ignores one thing - technology. I see the demand for high speed travel reducing, not increasing. Lower speeds are safer and more environmentally friendly.

It's a white elephant serving basically no purpose.

 

[AlastairFraser]

That ignores one thing - technology. I see the demand for high speed travel reducing, not increasing. Lower speeds are safer and more environmentally friendly.

It's a white elephant serving basically no purpose.

Yes technology may reduce demand but destroying the demand for the polluting domestic airline industry and providing much-needed relief to conventional rail would mean that Hyperloop is environmentally friendly and refinements in the technology over the next 20 years could make it much safer. If Britain implements Multiple-Occupancy Lanes on motorways (which is inevitable imho given that congestion levels will continue to increase as autonomous vehicles come onto the scene), then who will absorb the displaced commuters?

 

[takno]

I agree, but I can see it being viable over here when the TRL says it will be i.e 20 years later. Despite it's huge cost, it would revolutionise journey times across the UK and destroy the domestic airline industry in a way even High Speed Rail couldn't. It isn't then viable as a freight railway, but with the reduction of passenger traffic on the railways due to the new Hyperloop, it could use the conventional railway so much more.That's why I think HS2 is a white elephant.

My reading of the report was more "This is a hopeless technology. You might find a couple of niche purposes like parcel distribution, but nobody's getting in one those tubes anywhere anytime in the next 50 years. On the other hand we are a consulting organisation on the lookout for new customers and have no strong objections to working on lost causes as long as we get paid. Here's our card".

 

[AlastairFraser]

My reading of the report was more "This is a hopeless technology. You might find a couple of niche purposes like parcel distribution, but nobody's getting in one those tubes anywhere anytime in the next 50 years. On the other hand we are a consulting organisation on the lookout for new customers and have no strong objections to working on lost causes as long as we get paid. Here's our card".

Well surely that says more about the TRL as a organisation than the actual merits of the Hyperloop. How about we wait and see how it develops in countries like America, Canada and Australia, a lot bigger than our small island?

 

[Meerkat]

I think it will be a difficult sell to get passengers into a sealed windowless capsule in an airless underground tube.

 

[mallard]

I think it will be a difficult sell to get passengers into a sealed windowless capsule in an airless underground tube.

Agreed. The parallel with the early almost-windowless London Underground carriages comes to mind... No reason to expect it to be any more popular 100+ years later.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes technology may reduce demand but destroying the demand for the polluting domestic airline industry and providing much-needed relief to conventional rail would mean that Hyperloop is environmentally friendly and refinements in the technology over the next 20 years could make it much safer. If Britain implements Multiple-Occupancy Lanes on motorways (which is inevitable imho given that congestion levels will continue to increase as autonomous vehicles come onto the scene), then who will absorb the displaced commuters?

I just don't buy your view. Travel demand is in my view likely to reduce in the long term, certainly business travel and commuting, as tech becomes an increasingly viable alternative.

That you don't have to drive the car is neither here nor there - it won't *generate* demand.

 

[jon0844]

I know he has a lot of haters, and some of his videos can (and do) ramble on and become quite repetitive, but Thunderf00t's videos on YouTube have IMO debunked the practicality of Hyperloop ever since it was first mentioned by Elon Musk (who himself doesn't seem to be very heavily involved in its development, either now or for some considerable time).

There's another thread on Quora from years ago that also talks about why it isn't likely, however good an idea it might seem - along with maglev trains everywhere, and those videos on social media showing how fire engines will look in the future, or 'buses' that run on existing roads over cars. All concept stuff with little to no chance of ever becoming reality.

I think reality is finally hitting the media over autonomous cars, realising that cars really aren't likely to be driving themselves around - even with the introduction of low-latency 5G to hook them all up - for a lot longer than the 'next few years' that keeps getting mentioned. There are so many issues that may never be overcome unless we create a dedicated, almost rail-like, controlled environment for them to operate. They just can't work alongside existing vehicles with real people, pedestrians etc. They hesitate (because they have to 'fail safe') and will not be able to break rules that sometimes have to be broken when things go wrong.

 

[takno]

Well surely that says more about the TRL as a organisation than the actual merits of the Hyperloop. How about we wait and see how it develops in countries like America, Canada and Australia, a lot bigger than our small island?

Are you saying that it reflects badly on TRL if they don't drink whatever Kool Aid is available on any given day?

There's really nothing in it right now though that looks like a credible technology within the working life of any of us. I'm more than happy for people to burn a bit of R&D money on the concept though. Hell, given another 20 years it may start to look like something that could be worth tentatively doing some real product development for another 20 years.

When that kind of early product dev thinking gets dangerous is when you let it affect your decisions about real investment happening now. Elon mostly pumped it up for a couple of months as part of the campaign against high-speed rail in California, and you can see it being used here as some kind of argument about HS2. The fact is that HS2 will probably be built and used for 50 years before even better-suited countries have a Hyperloop (or whatever actual credible technology comes along to take its place).

 

[MarkyT]

Here's One of those Thunderfoot videos:

 

[al78]

Travel demand is in my view likely to reduce in the long term, certainly business travel and commuting, as tech becomes an increasingly viable alternative.

That is what was said when high speed broadband was developed. The roads and trains are as rammed full as ever.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That is what was said when high speed broadband was developed. The roads and trains are as rammed full as ever.

Actually, try taking a south WCML commuter service on a Friday vs. on other days. The difference is noticeable. "Friday from home" is just the start.

As for the motorways, I don't find them *anywhere near* as bad as they were 20 years ago. Though Smart/Managed Motorways and the M6 Toll have helped.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Here's One of those Thunderfoot videos:

Thank you! Someone is using common sense!

 

[AlastairFraser]

I think it will be a difficult sell to get passengers into a sealed windowless capsule in an airless underground tube.

Probably, but the time saved would surely eventually entice people onto the Hyperloop, just like what happened with the Hyperloop. And we've got to realise on this forum that Hyperloop is an emerging technology and the current concept isn't going to be the final,perfected form of it. We may as well experiment with Hyperloop given the significant benefits over conventional rail and other modes of transport it could offer.