Here's thunderf00t's video proving the Hyperloop will kill you...

Here's thunderf00t's video proving the Hyperloop will kill you. Is this a valid experiment that concludes the Hyperloop will be a failure or is it clickbait trash? He has a PhD in chemistry if that changes anything

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=YIVJvpNyjdc
youtube.com/watch?v=RNFesa01llk
youtube.com/watch?v=DDwe2M-LDZQ
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Fuck. Forgot the video

youtube.com/watch?v=YIVJvpNyjdc

>thunderf00t's

stop reading there

You should watch his other longer video on the hyperloop's various problems.

His points seems reasonable enough.
The whole system looks too much prone to failure, since a retard with a hammer could easily damage the structure enough to block the operation of the whole thing for multiple days.

And that in the case one builds intermediary blocks that prevent single point failures to be life critical, by isolating each segment of the tube.

There is no way they can deliver their current publicised product

thunderfoot is a memey pseudointellectual

ad hominem
Refute his arguments or go to /tv/ if you want to bitch about yt celebs

f00tposting doesn't merit a dialogue. Go to /tv/ if you want to talk about yt celebs.

I dont want to. You faggots mentioned his person when OP is asking about the validity of his experiments.

Does he make any points which couldn't be applied to maglev trains? AFAIK hyperloop is just a maglev train in a vacuum tube, so what's the big deal?

>honestly whoever thought that keeping millions of cubic meters in a vacuum is practical must be completely scientifically ignorant.
It doesn't even really need to be hard vacuum though.

Spaz

The solar powered bit is rather gimmicky. Obviously it would be connected to the grid such that it could actually run when the sun isn't visible.

you need to suck in front so wind blowsback

>proving
>outside of math

delete your account

Why didnt musk just fly the eagles to the hyperloop?

just like yo mama :^)

>thunderfoot
>elon
>pick one

Hmmmm

> make the same argument over and over again
> dont discuss any obvious counter solutions like sensory locks at distinct intervals to minimize damage

kill yourself

Thunderf00t really is the thorn in the side of meme money making scams

It isn't a video about how the hyperloop will kill you, it's a video about how the hyperloop can kill you.

Vacuum failures won't necessarily happen all that often. We can build oil pipelines that hold way more than vacuum pressure and we don't have too many oil pipeline failures.

In addition, one might be able to use periodically placed airbags to limit the effect of the vacuum leak.

...

Thunderf00t tends to mix good points with autistic non-arguments, but the "debunking" videos I've seen of him have all been quite solid.
The video you posted is just an experiment that shows the effect of pressure differences and how that could be a problem with the Hyperloop.

The next video is where he criticises the Hyperloop as a concept, it's way too long but I think he is basically right:
youtube.com/watch?v=RNFesa01llk

Although I do remember reading about the thing and how difficult it would be to sustain a hard vacuum, so they where going for low pressure+turbine instead or some shit. Don't know how low the pressure was supposed to be.

Most of these "debunking" videos are basically just thunderf00t getting mad at journalists and advertisers for not understanding engineering or science. He raises some good and interesting points in his videos, but most of the time the videos are about sarcastic rambling. His fanbase also seems to consist of nihilistic pseudointellectuals.

retard

Thunderf00t destroys Libertarian arguments beautifully, so of course the faggot Libertarians on 4chins try to silence him.

>talk on a mongolian clay pot appreciation board
>silencing
>same thing

>chemist with an opinion
>about an engineering project

>knowitall faggot poopoos something they don't reallu understand
>therefore it's impossible
>qed

>muh 'they laughed at Galileo' bullshit
The hyperloop is fundamentally flawed and its been thoroughly proven, bud. Sorry reality isn't sympathetic towards one rich faggot's silly dreams.

>shitposter with an opinion
i would've stopped reading there but it was too late

If he were around in the 1800s, he would have argued that high pressure steam kettles were far too dangerous to pull people around. And why would anyone in their right mind want to go faster than 40 mph?

>i would've stopped reading there
>but i was t00 st00pid to do so

Ok now we know it's you virallen your own stupid opinion. I would have left it at le downvote but now enjoy your sage and report for spamming.

>that one guy posting BACK THEN [ARBITARY THING] WAS THOUGHT IMPOSSIBLE TOO, SO THAT PROVES IT WILL WORK
every goddamn thread

He's a chemist and is therefore an outsider looking in, meaning he doesn't really know what he's talking about.

already had a thread about this

no.

every couple years thunderf00t makes a decent video. then he spends the next 6 months essentially uploading slight variations on that same video.

>a vacuum bubble surrounding said train
>vacuum bubble

Hahahahahahahahahaha

The big deal is atmospheric pressure turning the precious vacuum tube into a pancake.

He posted it like it was a real thing. Vacuum bubbles.

Normal rails struggle to stay profitable but we're supposed to believe a glorified bendy straw is gonna solve all our problems. Not to mention the idiocy of putting a turbine in a vacuum

His last words "with no way of stopping" is just bullshit. They'd surely just add safety measures like an automated emergency brake and the problem is solved.

A few problems I noticed.

The giant fan on the front was never for power but to move air from the front to the rear because it's not a perfect vacuum, so some air will need to be moved.

That brings up the second point, they started designing pods smaller than the tube specifically so they don't need the fan. This probably means that in the case of the tube failing and air rushing in, there won't be the problem of the pods shooting down the tube.

Can't remember source, but if I'm wrong please lemme know. Might be talking out my ass for all I know.

>We can build oil pipelines that hold way more than vacuum pressure and we don't have too many oil pipeline failures.
oil pipelines don't get capsules full of people shot through them at near the speed of sound

Rodent's ass

Well I suppose that you could call it an anti bubble, like how we call electron holes quasi particles. Sure, its not really a bubble but surely if you inverse your view it can be regarded as such.

Thundercuck is just butthurt he never invented helium

>Musk should build it on Mars because there is already a vacuum there
I am 99% sure that this came out of conversations at SpaceX on how to develop Mars once self-sufficiency was established.

I mean like:
>>Hey, if we made a hovertrain on Mars, it could go really fast.
>Wow, this is better than what we have on Earth!
>>You know, it's not actually impossible to build a pipe with Mars air pressure on Earth...

Yes, Jesus Christ, I saw that later.

Elton Musk and his fanboys are a living caricature of themselves.

youtube.com/watch?v=DDwe2M-LDZQ

>>followup video addressing all the mongoloid comments with the same arguments as the morons ITT

How does it feel to have the scientific prowess and reading comprehension of youtube commenters, Musk dicksuckers?

Every time you drive under a river, or ride an underground metro, you are in a form of pressure tube, surrounded by rock/water under pressure. They.do.not.burst.open they are not made of glass. I have designed submersible concrete tubes that get joined, submerged and water removed. oddly enough, driving through these is not a problem.

There are thousands of ways to protect the tube from attack/failure Obviously the simplest is to stick it below ground or cover it with a berm, to name just 2.

Expansion of a 300 km metal tube? expansion joints. easy.

This is a shit, high-school, clickbait thread.

t. ignorant idiot talking out his ass

>supported by patreon
Hah and I thought that jew would only take money from patreon for actual science videos.

>honestly whoever thought that keeping millions of cubic meters at .001atm is practical must be completely scientifically ignorant.
there you go user

thunderfoot when it comes to this desu
elon is a businessman and does what businessmen do - and I'm pretty sure he himself is aware of the issues posed by the system, but again, businessman

oil pipelines also look like pic related
I want a train, not a rollercoaster. Hell, at the speeds his proposing, anything but a straight line for the entirety of some hundreds of km, considering the capsule manages to actually be contained in the tube, would be very harmful to humans

here's a counter ebin quote

Because oil is people

You're brilliant!

I've seen Musk redefine the automobile and privatize the space race. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, it's his money anyway.

>privatize the space race
He only has better PR. SpaceX is not the first to do what it's doing business-wise

>I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, it's his money anyway.
Musk isn't developing the hyperloop. He just threw the idea out there and said he was too busy with other stuff to build it himself, so anyone who wanted to was free to do it.

>He only has better PR. SpaceX is not the first to do what it's doing business-wise
Are you kidding? The only private rocket before SpaceX was Pegasus, which is a small-lift launch vehicle notable for one of the poorest $/kg cost figures.

What space is "doing business-wise" is not limited to flying orbital payloads. It's offering the the best prices and gearing up for dramatic cuts in the next few years, while preparing to deploy by far the largest vehicle available on the market for contracted launches (if SLS ever flies, it'll be a NASA toy, not a commercial product, at least until the mid-2020s). In other words, they're dominating the launch market. That's not PR.

They do in that one Bond film

>privatise the space race
You can thank shit-tier neoliberal, unpatriotic, short-sighted, "muh private-sector" loving politicians for that. Musk just took the bone they tossed at him.

>shit-tier neoliberal, unpatriotic, short-sighted, "muh private-sector" loving politicians
What kind of chimp thinks that NASA's investments in SpaceX aren't paying off a hundred times better than the shuttle or SLS/Orion?

They've made flyback recovery work, and are on the verge of demonstrating cost-saving reusability of a vehicle that's a bargain even when treated as an expendable. Dragon has worked well and the crew version promises to be the most advanced and cost effective manned spacecraft ever built, with no credible competition on the horizon from anyone.

MSFC, on the other hand, has had to abandon their flagship space shuttle and admit that it was an utter failure at its stated goals. They've been assigned to recreate Apollo capabilities they had half a century ago, and have had to admit that they're not even capable of that. Now they're shoveling taxpayer money into the fire developing a rocket to nowhere with cut-down capabilities and ballooning costs.

That's because congress continuously strangles and bullies NASA for whatever short-term political gain is around at the time.

Source: YouTube lecture by a Cambridge professor, who claimed the ESA is way more efficient than NASA for this reason.

That's nice, except the ESA has been laughably unambitious from the start, particularly in regards to launch vehicles, where it's interested only in reproducing NASA technology and hiring Soviet equipment.

The ESA, for instance, has never launched a man into space on their own launch vehicle or in their own spacecraft.

It's far easier to point to something someone else has done and tell engineers, "do that" than to manage the development of genuinely new technology.

Kind of like how drugs are cheaper in most of the world than in the USA, where the drugs are actually invented. Where the USA protects drug development returns with straightforward monopoly patents, most other countries have mandatory licensing rules which allow local manufacturers to copy US-developed drugs in return for payments ranging from "zero" to "insufficient to create an incentive to develop new drugs". Good job being "more efficient" by riding on someone else's coattails.

tl;dr SpaceX is kicking ESA's ass as badly as MSFC's and ULA's.

Manned spaceflight isn't really a priority in the European space sector, so the EC doesn't contract ESA to do so. ESA does mainly Earth Observation (Copernicus is the most ambitious EO project in human history), with the occasional deep space mission.

Comparing ESA and SpaceX is bit ridiculous in that regard, as the requirements and the contracts are different.

Lord Kelvin thought that trains would kill people because the air would tend to compress to the back of the train. People get things wrong all the time.

What he said. Don't compare like for like, instead look at what ESA is achieving with what funds/budget and then look at what NASA is doing with what funds/budget. The guy in the lecture claimed that NASA is far too embedded in the government/political system of the USA to be efficient because politicians and bureaucrats are constantly all up in its business, but the solution isn't privatising it but making it an independent body. They'd get a bunch of money and do with it what they want, this is how ESA operates to my knowledge (I'm oversimplifying a little but you get the idea).

>They'd get a bunch of money and do with it what they want, this is how ESA operates to my knowledge (I'm oversimplifying a little but you get the idea).

Yes and no. ESA is basically an independent multinational contractor that grabs contracts from anywhere, but mostly from the European Commission. As many of these organisations (e.g. ECMWF), it's somewhere between public and private.

I would however not say ESA is fundamentally more efficient than NASA, as someone who's worked with/for both. ESAs mission preparation time is godawfully long, and you can almost say that there's a bit of money laundering going on given the cost of some missions or mission components.

It's the best we get, so people aren't very adamant about complaining.

The good thing about ESA compared to NASA is the political stability - the EC isn't going to suddenly turn around and scrap programmes, whereas US congress did a few times.

What breaks the hyperloop isn't the technology. It's the sheer cost of it. Everything in the system would be 100% proprietary and thus have huge maintenance costs. And then there's the issue of actually laying down track, as getting Eniment Domain rights for a Right-Of-Way is hugely expensive and time consuming. And the track itself cannot have any breaks or branch lines.

For comparison, building new train lines is much cheaper and is 100% compatible with the existing infrastructure and transit. More importantly, maintenance costs are low and throughput is very high.

>Copernicus is the most ambitious EO project in human history
No it isn't. It's an arbitrary bundle of surveillance and science satellites. US Earth observation efforts are much more advanced than the ESA's, but they aren't arbitarily bundled like this to seem more impressive.

You can't even compare ESA and NASA. ESA is like NASA, ULA, USAF Space Command (minus the arsenal), Orbital ATK, and SpaceX all bundled together. It's the focus of commercial, scientific, and defense space activities for its member countries. Basically, if it's to do with space in ESA member countries, and not a missile, it goes through some branch of the ESA.

American space activities are much broader and more comprehensive, with more private industry involvement as well as more public spending.

The whole Ariane rocket family has 230 launches. Add Vega and Soyuz from Guiana, and the total ESA orbital launches (attempted and successful) are still under 250.

Just the space shuttle and Delta II alone had over 280 successful launches, both of which started flying after the first Ariane, and have now been effectively discontinued (there's a couple of Delta II rockets in storage, which are intended to eventually launch, but it's been out of production for years). The Atlas and Titan families each had over 300 launches. ULA and SpaceX are now each launching more than the ESA.

America supports competing and groundbreaking efforts, while the ESA achieves its "efficiency" by doing lesser versions of me-too projects with copied technology.

>MSFC, on the other hand, has had to abandon their flagship space shuttle and admit that it was an utter failure at its stated goals. They've been assigned to recreate Apollo capabilities they had half a century ago, and have had to admit that they're not even capable of that. Now they're shoveling taxpayer money into the fire developing a rocket to nowhere with cut-down capabilities and ballooning costs.

I've kinda started to agree with you on the whole SLS/Orion/MSFC thing. Fuck, I want to see that big fucking rocket get used(its a massive rocket after all), but I feel that the money could be better spent.
-Leave low-earth launches to private companies like ULA/Ariane/SpaceX/BO and so on, fund them, let them compete, and let them expand.
-Let MSFC focus on the real, no-profit R&D(at now, anyways), in a manner similar to JPL. Focus on developing stuff like
-ISRU
-Deep-space habitats
-Deep-space propulsion (nuclear, ion, plasma and so on)
-Life-support equipment

I get the patriotic need for a flagship program like the SLS, especially now that the Shuttle is gone, but I have a sneaking feeling that the job of one SLS could easily be handled by 1 or 2 launches of whatever SpaceX/ULA/Ariane comes up with next

>Leave low-earth launches to private companies
If you can't do LEO on schedule, safely, and on a reasonable budget, you certainly have no business doing anything beyond LEO.

There's no excuse for Apollo-era costs and Apollo-era risk-taking after half a century of spaceflight. Apollo was the first decade of spaceflight. They were inventing everything.

The SLS proposed schedule manages to be both unambitious and irresponsible at the same time. Orion was originally supposed to be primarily a LEO boat, for ISS crew rotation. That's how they were going to prove it with flight hours before sending it beyond LEO.

Now they're going to do one unmanned test with an incomplete SLS and an incomplete Orion, then after a few years, they'll stick astronauts in the first complete Orion, on a never-flown upper stage, and try to throw them around the moon.

If something goes wrong in LEO, you can be on the ground in under an hour. If something goes wrong on a moon flyby, you can have no way to get back in Earth atmosphere for a week.

The kicker is, it's not going to do anything that Falcon Heavy / Dragon can't do.

Not that I've watched the video in question so I dont really have an opinion, but this isn't really a valid comparison because we can accurately simulate that shit today.

I'm laughing at this moron who begins his sentences with the word "but".

Thunderf00t isn't "accurately simulating", though. He's just having opinions and trying to convince casually-interested laymen that he's right.

This isn't like Solar Roadways. The Solar Roadways people who ran that Indiegogo campaign are, in the first place, rather poor representatives for the idea of putting solar panels on roads (their hollow glass box version might have been easy to throw together with hand tools, but it's nothing like professional engineering -- other people are doing flexible glue-down panels with no voids). And they hired an over-the-top pitchman to make very bad arguments that even they would be ashamed to put forward as a serious case for their work. They're basically amateur enthusiasts asking for a budget that would be better given to professionals. Perfect for a guy like T00t to "debunk", even though his own arguments are quite sloppy and often flawed. He was, after all, just belaboring the obvious.

But hyperloop is an idea being developed, analysed, and invested in by highly qualified experts who've been successful in other challenging engineering tasks. T00t's not operating at their level. He's pointing out "fatal flaws" that the people working on hyperloop have, of course, already taken into account and analysed in much more detail than he has. But they're still working on hyperloop.

Do you really think SpaceX is the only private company with launch capability?

>Do you really think SpaceX is the only private company with launch capability?

>The only private rocket before SpaceX was Pegasus
>before SpaceX
>before

this isnt a fucking chemistry question. you have it the other way around. thunderfoot has no fucking business throwing his opinion into this

>every local damage is a damage to the whole line
trains aren't much different. If the track is damaged, you're not moving.

What would be horrible is if you were trapped in the loop due to the line being down.

No, it doesn't prove Musk's idea's right, it just shows laughing at inventor and calling his idea stupid or unrealistic doesn't disprove the idea