The next big thing?
In 50 AC, Romans used grooves to reduce horses' work, improve sliding and provide guidance to wagons. Later on, during the XVI century, English and Germans used a similar system inside their carbon mines: wooden planks guides took the place of grooves, and metal slabs were placed to reduce wear. In a short while, the tracks, keen to fill up with rocks and dirt, were replaced with over-the-ground rails. It was in the XVIII, with the introduction of flanges to the wheels, that modern railway was born.
Interesting fact: the 1440 millimetres gap between Romans grooves only differ by 5 millimetres from today's standard tracks gauge (1435 mm). However, rail transport has massively evolved since its introduction, and it had a fundamental role in the growth of the most developed nations. While its commercial viability has shown ups and downs over the centuries, rail transport is nowadays the most energy-efficient and environmental-friendly way to move, and one of the safest.
The Hyperloop, sometimes described as the 'fifth mode of transport' (although it is somehow related to rail) allow people and goods to travel at high speeds inside capsules within a tube with low pressure. The propulsion is generated by linear induction engines and air compressors, and the capsules float on air bearings. One of the goals of the proposers is to supply the system with energy generated entirely from sustainable sources: sun, wind, geothermal and even the kinetic energy of the motion.
Moreover, the infrastructure is supposed to run over pylons, ideally placed along the median lane of major motorways, with an aimed commercial speed of 1200 km/h. The latter is the real game-changer for intercity travels and potential city development: everything will be undoubtedly nearer, and the bond between jobs and places to live looser; that allow the building of 'satellite' cities with higher living standards, less overcrowded and more affordable overall.
But this technology comes with some unresolved issues. Standard high-speed trains and relative infrastructure have a design speed of 400 km/h: this requires, at least, curves with 10 kilometres radius. Supposing that Hyperloop technology will be able to manage tighter curves, supported by gimmicks to reduce the 'push' on people (e.g. the rotation of the guideway on curve), the three-time higher design speed will not allow small radii as the forces applied are comparable to those in a military jet.
From a safety point of view, it seems unclear how to manage atmospheric pressure within a reasonable amount of time without crashing the capsule (which runs at over 1000 km/h) into a pressurized section. Furthermore, restoring the vacuum afterwards would take hours to complete. Not to mention other operational issues, like the considerable amount of energy needed to stop the capsules, which somehow balance the energy saved by travelling with minimum friction.
Further scepticism follows the promoters' statement that claims Hyperloop is a transport alternative cheaper to build and profitable. Actually, over or under the ground infrastructures require strong financial efforts and the tube is going to be costly as well, to resist thermal expansion and seismic events. In conclusion, it is reasonable to think that the problems will be addressed and the technology will have a commercial application at some point; however, thinking that it will completely replace high-speed railways for intercity services is certainly overly optimistic. Especially considering the capacity gap between the two modes: to challenge the 20.000 passengers per hour of the British HS2, a pod with 50 people on board should leave a station every few seconds, an impossible goal to achieve.
Comments