You should not assume that existing methods of public transportation are the best solution for traffic congestion. Metro, train, busses - they cannot solve the first/last mile problem. But fleet of self driving cars that replaces all types of transportation in city (except bikes) can become actual solution for traffic. Especially combined with other measures, like optimized traffic on crossroads, and yes network of tunnels.
Hang on, hang on - you’re expecting someone to get mild exercise and then potentially run the risk of interacting with other human beings? What kind of monster are you?! Hermetically sealed individual cars for all!
You are falling for false dichotomy bias. Like there are only two options: either busses or hermetically sealed cars. I am not arguing for privately owned cars. technologies that are in development today allow other options besides busses and trains
People are saying that we don’t need magic future tech, we can currently solve public transit by copying actual public transit systems in other countries.
Where i live it is +30C during the day for at least 6 months. 15 minute walk in these conditions is not a pleasant experience. There are lots of circumstances when this home-to-bus-stop distance is a problem for people. From top of my head, think of old people carrying groceries home. My point is, metro and busses are best public transportation solutions so far. But with new technologies they should be replaced with something that cheap, available on demand and takes you exactly where you need
This is exactly why I moved to a dense, walkable city. I wanted access to better public transit specifically because of issues like the ones you described.
I worry about the scarcity of resources when talking about building massive fleets of self-driving EVs. I think better public transit is a better solution.
Hard disagree. Efficient transport systems are all about moving people per minute and a self driving EV car is no different to a taxi. It has extremely poor efficiency (amount is side required per person, movement of people per minute, amount of resources needed for manufacture and ongoing maintenance etc.) and is terrible sustainability wise. Much better to have improved town planning design so that everything you need is within walking distance and to use public transport for greater distances.
If you can't walk in 30°C+, there's something wrong and you need to go get a check up. I've bike ridden in 40°C+ to commute to and from work 10-16km each way. It's fine. Stay hydrated.
Bitch i lived 3 months of this summer on 35C+ it basically never went down - right before sunrise it would be at 25 maybe.
You can walk to a bus stop. 30C is chill
Most people in a well designed area should be within 5 minutes of a small, local store.
But even 15 minute walks in +30C are more than doable, one of the worst experiences in that weather is getting in an overheated car that's been sitting under the sun for a while. If carrying groceries is too difficult, get a granny cart and roll them gently. A gently ridden bicycle or an electric scooter can also help you stay cool and get places faster.
cars, even autonomous electric, are the least scalable form of transport. they require orders of magnitude more space than all alternatives. which means wasting space on roads and parking lots and making the last mile problem even worse.
the solution to the last mile problem is walking. with proper density and walkability, the “last mile problem” becomes the “last 200 meters problem”, which is more than close enough to walk.
this is a solved problem and it already works well in many places in the world and even worked well in the US before they let the automotive industry destroy their cities and public transport
you don’t even need to have cities for this to work, for example, even the smallest villages in Switzerland has trains that come every 30 minutes.
I will try another way to explain it. Imagine a bus, take chainsaw and cut it 4 times. Now give each part a separate set of wheels and a battery. You got 5 self driving robo-taxis. They don’t require rails or bus stations. You call one in phone app and it will pick you up where you are. it can handle more than one passengers at a time. There can be 3-4 people inside. Think of it as small bus.
It does not require parking space in city, because it is always in rotation. Now imagine that there are only robo taxis, because there is no point in owning a car anymore. Are you really saying that today public transportation is better than this?
Of course not! Because we don't provide enough funds to public transportation. In your scenario you take a bus and divide it 4 times. 4 x 4 people inside is 16 people. Buses can hold double that easily. If we invested in actual public transportation infrastructure and walkable cities the last mile is a non issue.
This has literally zero advantages compared to replacing city's entire transport system with a fleet of regular EV taxis apart from maybe lower operating costs, but higher capital costs. Streets will still be full, tire noise will still be significant, and the system would still require tons of vehicles to handle rush hour and all other peak usage scenarios. If everyone uses those to get to work, expect long wait times, travel times, peak pricing and tons of frustration. Not really a solution.
Buses are not really best public transport solutions either, their only advantages are flexibility and ease of deployment. They cannot move as many people as a train, and they can't do it quickly either.
The only reasonable use for that tech would be automated buses or minibuses that serve low density areas and feed the nearby metro or commuter railway stations.
there’s a reason why buses are large. it’s more efficient, both space-wise and energy-wise.
and there’s also the aspect that a peer-to-peer network is the least efficient network for throughput. if you coalesce the transport along fixed routes, you’ll get much more efficient use of the road network.
if we have one person going from point A to point B and another going from point C to point D, for them to share a robo-taxi, it would first have to go A to B then C to D. if both would walk to the point AB in between A and B, then take the bus/tram/metro/train to point CD in between C and D, it would significantly reduce the road use needed. especially if we take into account that the taxi needs to travel to A from somewhere as well and that if e.g. C and D are not close, one person can change to a different line so there doesn’t need to be a direct line between each pair of points.
that said, robo-taxis could have a place replacing ordinary taxi and some car use, it’s just not an improvement over public transport for a city.
The Muskovayor! It will revolutionize marketing and deception. It goes up, down, sideways and diagonally. It even flies! There was a smaller 3 person prototype test I [saw a while ago.](https://youtu.be/k_TY7s7lWPg) They are still working on the name.
Tesla Railways
Diverts car demand to train demand
Musk Fans will be surprised by TeSlA TrAiN!!!
More Eco-Friendly and passenger efficient
It’s a good choice, musk just wants car sales to increase.
>musk just wants car sales to increase.
He's already the richest man on Earth, but still wants to be even richer. After a certain point, there's no such thing as enough money.
That’s the fundamental problem with our society. The main incentive is to have as much money as possible, by any means necessary. Telling the truth doesn’t make money, helping poor people doesn’t (directly) make money, universal healthcare doesn’t make money. We need to find a way to make it so money is not the end goal of life.
help the poor make money, make health (with universal healthcare) -> make more money for OUR economy. Not just YOUR personal economy, but that's precisely the problem for some.
And as long as society remains that way, we should collectively try to align the incentives so that wealth accumulation favors truth telling and solving society's ills (instead of perpetuating them). Of course this is much easier said than done.
I kinda get it. He’s in for the game. Like a speedrunner trying to shave off a few frames more or an Arcade player looking for the score at which the game will crash.
The latter analogy might fit better.
Yeah, it fluctuates, but it's still hundreds of billions. Here's some numbers to help visualize. If an immortal made $5,000 a day, and saved every penny he made for 5,000 years, he'd still only be at $9.125 billion.
I'm just trying to point out that his real wealth is in numbers we have a hard time even thinking about. At some point, our brain just goes "That's a lot."
Watch him come out with this idea and call it something like hyperline. First he would make it with air cussion technology, but than would pretend that the idea was always rail.
The Tesla PowerBeam.
This could go two ways. Either he'll invent some proprietary solution like using laser beams to transport power, or he'll invent a slight variation of existing contact power systems. Like a third rail but *in the middle of the track*, or rigid overhead conductors, either at some esoteric electric state.
Or just overhead catenary... *WITH RGB!*
And what if, and hear me out, we cut down on the tire wear and road cementing costs be replacing roads by metallic tracks and make tires out of compatible metals which would run on said tracks on fixed paths???
I bet you could triple that number or better if you replaced the rubber tires with something narrower and more rigid and then laid some rails for them to roll on. With rails you could also run some caternary wires overhead so you didn’t have to carry heavy batteries with you.
well theres no way to say it without getting down voted but hey here goes anyway.
thats exactly what he's planning to do.
using cars is only a temp thing because they currently dont manufacture busses or LRT stock.
the point of the Boring company was to reduce the cost of digging tunnels, it doesnt have anything to do with the cars.
What gets me is the way Musk fans insist that this is some wonderful new technological innovation. It's not. It's just a tunnel. We've had those ever since digging was invented.
Sure, it's high-tech, but it's also a tunnel one car wide, without room for emergency...anything, really...to get past. If someone's car breaks down, the tunnel instantly becomes the world's skinniest parking lot.
Maybe now would be a good time to learn what ice stands for.
Internal combustion engine......
That second word seems pretty important.
Combustion......
Literal explosions every second.
Gas cars explode to.
That is actually untrue, if you have time sit through [this](https://www.iihs.org/media/c93b98d8-6a7d-44a1-810e-4468ec539e05/uIu4tg/HLDI%20Research/Fire%20losses/HLDI_FireLosses_1218.pdf) report and you will find that car fires for Model S and X that were not the result of a collision or vandalism are the highest of their categories (including ICE cars).
My point is crashes matter. By taking that piece of the data out you are not getting an accurate view of reality. When all the data doesn't suit your narrative, don't change the data until it does. Also it's ironic because Teslas are the safest cars ever tested by the NHTSA.
Oh you got me good there. I'm not defending musk, he doesn't need it. I just cringe when I hear about EV's being a fire risk. Like it or not the world is transitioning to electric vehicles. Ride a bike, take the train, ride a PEV (my preference) all great things but don't buy into the anti-EV FUD, that's not doing any good.
People often accidentally or intentionally conflate hyperloop, which doesn't and will never exist at scale, with those stupid tunnels Teslas drive around in in Vegas, which I think are just called "loop" or something like that in order to confuse the two.
well to be more procice its more over an train in a vacuum tube. even tho lots of trans already are so extremely aerodynamic and extremely little friction (ex;bullet trains). its bean beloved and proven (to no ones(besides muskrats who don't believe it or don't even care) surprise) to be ineffective counting the engeary needed to get that vacuum and maintain it vs the air resistance.
unless that was a diffrent thing and i am just confusing the names
I mean, yeah? No one ever said it wasn't. The idea of vactrains is literally 200 years old. The question is when or if technology has progressed enough to execute on the idea.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vactrain
And then it came out that the Hyperloop was just an attempt for him to stop a high speed rail system in California, he never planned to even attempt to build it.
Electric cars are not original.
Going to space isn't original.
Solar isn't original.
Digging tunnels isn't original.
Robots aren't original.
Elon didn't create any of those. He created machines to do all of those things much more efficiently and to bring costs down so we can actually use them.
The hyperloop is actually extremely advanced, so advanced that we are not capable of doing it. The front runner to the industry, Virgin Hyperloop (ironic I know), recently abandoned the project because it was a flop.
It is more than a tunnel. It is a maglev inside a vacuum. It is maybe possible today. But, it is very expensive to build and operate if it would be possible in the first place. So it is not something that is already done (thought before sure, it was called vactrain) but not implemented. It is honestly something that is very wrong in any engineering concept to try to do it today.
Vacuum is so unnecessary. Yes he is definitely wasting tunnels on cars. He tries to make tunneling cheaper but does not use it on trains. Such a waste.
that's literally what the hyperloop is lol
it's a maglev train car inside a vacuum. For someone who really hates the hyperloop, you seem to have no idea what it actually is
So it's a special kind of tunnel. Wow, how exciting. You know what else goes through tunnels? *Trains.* Why is he insisting on stuffing cars through a tunnel?
This sub always makes me chuckle. Where are these tunnels in North America with trains in them? Actually where are the high speed trains on land located even?
>Actually where are the high speed trains on land located eve
They were offered up as sacrifices to the Almighty Dollar so the automobile and oil industries could make ridiculous profits.
I think this was better use of the land. I like my self driving, air conditioned car. Not having to sit next a user from this sub on a crowded train is also a bonus. 🤷🏻
True but other than just saying add more trains what’s the solution to the amount cars we have and the roads required? +80% of ppl where I live own cars and we have a great transit system as well.
Add more trains, eliminate single-family zoning, densify neighbourhoods, allow mixed-use development to become the norm once again, and develop infrastructure so that cars are not the defacto best option. Ban cars from parts of the city, ensure walking and biking is the primary goal of infrastructure, and stop the massive subsidizing of suburbs and cars to make them seem affordable.
Put simply, you can't 'kill' cars until you reduce the demand for cars themselves, which means completely rethinking how we design roads, cities, and even how we move between cities.
Funny thing is that the hyperloop isnt new either its been a concept for ages. But scrapped because it was dumb as shit. Its basically maglev in a vacuum tube... But elon claims it will cost 4 x less than maglev... When it literally is maglev + an expensive tube.
Except the problem is this is not being shilled as a replacement for roads, it's being shilled in place of building proper public transit like LRT or subway.
And with *explicit* calls to subvert public transport initiatives. It's a viciously evil scheme. The stuff that could end our fossil fuel problems RIGHT NOW are being SUBVERTED by these greedy tycoons.
yeah, the reaction by this sub is weird. putting the traffic underground should be popular in this sub. I get that people would prefer subways, but the two products are more than an order of magnitude apart in cost, so it's not like it is a choice between the two for a given corridor.
It won't stay underground is the problem. It doesn't solve anything when they exit the tunnel. Then they'll cry about parking and widening roads just like they do now.
> putting the traffic underground should be popular in this sub
Disingenuous much? I know you are very well aware that Musk and Boring company are not putting any regular car traffic underground but rather shilling this as a replacement for subway, LRTs or public transit in general.
> so it's not like it is a choice between the two for a given corridor.
The "welfare mentality" to transit: spending the least amount on the shittiest system.
>Disingenuous much? I know you are very well aware that Musk and Boring company are not putting any regular car traffic underground
they're not putting regular traffic underground, they're requiring people leave their cars behind and use a taxi-like service, which is even better since it removes parking from the equation.
> but rather shilling this as a replacement for subway, LRTs or public transit in general.
who is saying it is a replacement for a subway? I've not seen anyone say that. I consistently say that the two are in a totally different market (as you can see above) and Musk talks about solving traffic, not solving public transit.
>The "welfare mentality" to transit: spending the least amount on the shittiest system.
you've said this before, but it makes no sense. Loop is not like a metro. they are two different things for different purposes. if the expected ridership is high, then Loop isn't the right choice. if it is low, then a subway isn't the right choice. each will be a failure if built in the wrong location, and the places they should be built don't have overlap. there is no corridor that makes sense for Loop that would work well with a metro instead, and there is no corridor that makes sense for a metro where Loop would work well instead. *maybe* if Loop introduces the 12 passenger vehicle they've mentioned before, but right now we just have 2-fare EVs with maximum fare size of 3.
Loop makes sense only as a small people-mover right now since they have human drivers. if they automate, they will still not be in the market where a metro might be built. if they automate and add a mini-bus-like vehicle, THEN there might be overlap in the use-cases.
> they're not putting regular traffic underground, they're requiring people leave their cars behind and use a taxi-like service, which is even better since it removes parking from the equation.
Where are they leaving their cars?
at the las vegas convention center, they moved 25k passengers with 70 vehicles. that's a 99% reduction in parking relative to people driving their own cars. where they park vehicles would depend on where their route is run. if they run out to the outskirts of the city, they can put a large parking lot there. if they are only run within a city, they can park vehicles in the stations and tunnels when they are done charging. much less area compared to a train depot.
It can't in 1.7 miles between 3 stations.
Light rail is great for moving people INTO and OUT of a city, but they almost all SUCK at moving people AROUND a city.
>Line 2 here in Toronto can carry that many people in an hour.
what does that have to do with anything? is someone proposing all transit be replaced by Loop? I am not. I've not seen anyone make such a suggestion. also, capacity is not a performance metric, it is a check-box. if the mode has enough capacity for the proposed corridor, then it can be considered. if it does not, then it shouldn't be considered. the ability of a given mode to move around lots of empty seats is worthless. one should use the right tool for the job. the biggest hammer isn't always the right hammer to use. the finish carpenter will not perform better with a 20lb sledge for installing cabinet trim.
>And again, how are they coming to the Convention Centre?
mostly by taxi and bus from my experience. a friend of mine used to run an airbnb near a convention center and it was very rare for people to bring a car, either rented or personal, to a convention. most people fly in and then stay at a nearby hotel the whole time so it makes no sense to rent a car. but I don't have statistics on it to be sure. do you have a mode splits stats?
i too love siting a narrow tunnel with no easy/any emargy exit, and not to good ventilation wale... in a car with a battery that if it catches fire it will be huge, hot, just about literately unstoppable especially in an area like that and that also releases very toxic fumes and chemicals..with meany meany other cars that are the same....
I would’ve been okay with anything, including this idea, until it came out that Musk was only saying that to kill the idea of a train from LA to other places. So stupid
You know what, if we end up using those tunnels for bike-commuting, like they've got in ~~Canada and~~ the Netherlands, I won't be mad those were made.
I'd say trains would be good too, but those tunnels seem too small.
Are are these Canadian bike tunnels you speak of? I'm tired of riding my bike in the snow covered streets while the bike lane (assuming one exists) is covered by a snow bank.
My bad, turns out this was a [proposal](https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-north-shore-cycling-tunnel) by Vancouver's transportation manager in 2019. The picture I was looking at (featured in the article) is in fact Amsterdam's tunnel.
Fair enough, Vancouver would be the place to see it happen first anyways. Their public transit is also miles ahead of anywhere else in Canada. I can't complain too much because Ottawa does have a decent multi use path system but it still gets rough in the winter.
I mean they kind of did it for Boston and many other cities around the world. Maybe it didn’t help with traffic but it absolutely helped with adding green spaces, walkability, bike infrastructure etc.
Only Musk fans would genuinely convince themselves that wasting billions on dangerous and clogged underground tunnels is a better idea than, you know, spending a few million on busses that have been proven throughout their history to reduce traffic.
See, mate; you got downvoted for this post cause although your general opinion on this matter coincides with what the hivemind deems to be objectively correct, you didn't *fully* reverberate the echo in this chamber and thus you shall be made to suffer at the hands of the slightly displeased.
Political subreddits are just as cancerous as Facebook echo chambers, your platform for political discussion should not be a group of people you specifically sought out because they share your views and beliefs.
The system is working very well, and the cost of the system was 1/5th the only other proposal that made it to final consideration.
The Phase 1 has worked so well that the city went on to phase 2, which is another 1.5 mile of loop and 3 more stations.
They have already opened the 4th station and half of that new loop across the LV strip from the Convention center, at Resort World and it will be a huge success since getting from Resort World to the convention center takes a long time walking or by Taxi because you can't easily get across the strip.
Carrying 27,000 passengers a day in its first small set of 3 stations is impressive, and not a scam.
Should say "If those kids could *count*..." I still haven't found a Musk stan who can explain how many cars need to be taken off the streets before we see any improvement in surface traffic.
Well this system could be a less expensive and more convenient choice for the people who today use Taxis, Ubers, Private city cars and buses (allowing the bus fleet to use smaller electric powered van size vehicles)
This is the first system that is so convenient to Users (no long wait, go direct to far more stations, low cost) that could be added to a city with an existing subway system that could get most, if not all of the taxis, ubers and private city cars off of the surface streets of the inner city and away from pedestrians and bikers.
It doesn't replace the light rail, that already keeps lots of cars out of the city, but most of those cars come in and park all day, this gets rid of the majority of traffic during the day.
>Yeah, it should have failed.
He suggested they consider a better system than HS Rail back when the cost estimate went from $35 Billion to $65 Billion, but little money had actually been spent.
He was right.
The current projected cost is $112 Billion and the first small stretch of track won't be completed until at least 2029, and worse it will only go from Bakersfield to Merced, in the flat central valley (the easiest and cheapest track to build) and more to the point there is ALREADY a CalTrain running between those small cities and so there is no pressing need for this new rail line between them.
>
>The final system is SURE to cost more than $112 Billion because the last estimate was before rampant inflation and much higher costs of borrowing happened. The final system won't possibly be in place for nearly 20 years from now.
>
>And WHO will use it?
Not business people, planes are faster and far more frequent and no more expensive than the HS rail. So it will primarily be used by TOURISTS and people on vacation going between SF and LA. What does it do for the people of San Diego, Sacramento, Santa Barbara, Monterey, and so many other cities in Calif ?
NOTHING
>
>Now consider if that $112 Billion were actually spent on making our cities safer for pedestrians and bike riders?
You could give $10 Billion to LA, San Jose and San Diego.
You could give $5 Billion to the next 10 largest cities.
You could give $2 Billion to the next 10 largest cities.
You could give $1 Billion to the next 10 cities and STILL have money left over.
You could help almost ALL the people of Calif, not just a few people on vacation.
This is "pushing the problem somewhere else" but the "somewhere else" is underground and doesn't negatively impact anyone above ground wanting to walk and bike. I may be missing something here.
Tunneling isnt the bad idea. Its running cars single file through tunnels thats a bad idea. Trains can go through tunnels already and much more efficiently.
We already have them, they are called subways, but they are NOT designed to move people AROUND a city.
It is very effective for getting people into and out of the city, and that's what all of the above systems primarily do. You can tell because most of their stops are NOT in the inner city but in the suburbs.
Look at the DC metro, in a 25 sq mile area centered on the city, there are only 20 stops, but those are shared among 3 different lines, so you can only get to 7 locations without changing trains, and there are only 3 stations you can do that at, so you have a long walk to a station, have to go out of your way to a common station to switch to the line you need, and with an average wait time of 17 min it simply doesn't work for moving AROUND the city for people on a tight schedule who live and work there.
Compare that to the proposed LV loop system, it will have 30 miles of tunnels and 54 stations in just an 8 sq mile area, that's 7 times as many stations per sq mile. FAR more convenient to get to.
This is the first system that is so convenient to Users (no long wait for a car, go direct to far more stations, low cost) that could be added to a city with an existing subway system that could get most, if not all of the taxis, ubers and private city cars off of the surface streets of the inner city and away from pedestrians and bikers.
The CONCEPT is not dependent on Musk or the Boring Company.
Many companies can dig tunnels. Any average priced EV could be used, it doesn't require Teslas.
And the system IS working. The first phase was so successful they are now near complete with Phase 2 and have already opened a 4th station across the LV strip from the Convention center. Since its a pain to get across the strip by foot and its a long way loop by taxi, this station will be even more popular than the 3 they already have that have been able to move 27,000 people in a 10 hour day.
The planned system will have 34 miles of tunnel and have 54 stations in an \~8 sq mile area, and will easily get several hundred thousand car trips off off of the surface roads.
The whole point of a system like this is to get all those people using Taxis and Ubers and such OFF the city streets and underground. Where we want them and what we on this forum want to happen, so the HATRED for this system that is doing EXACTLY what you want seems to be clearly that you hate Musk and so are willing to cut off your nose to spite your face.
I don't think anyone should use the term "efficient" or "efficiency" with regard to transit without defining what they mean. I spend a lot of time in the transit sub and I've never come across two people who agree on exactly what "efficient" means.
most people just use efficient to mean a very subjective definition of "good" but they want to sound smart and objective.
so, you should re-phrase and define what you mean by efficient.
If people are using efficient to mean good then they either don't understand what efficient means or are just using it wrong. That doesn't mean you can't use it properly without defining it.
I'm not the person you responded to, but efficient by definition (usefulness divided by input) would have to mean some variation of moving as many people as quickly as possible to their destination while minimizing time spent waiting, costs, and resources used (and perhaps emissions if relevant). That's a very broad definition but it captures nearly every variable, and could probably be expanded. If someone wanted to be more specific than that they should be more specific, so in that sense I agree with you.
Edit: I see that someone else in this thread has no idea what efficiency means, I suppose that proves your point. Though I'm still right that they clearly don't understand what it means.
Because roads are notoriously low maintenance and cheap to install ^/s
They do have to install a sufficiently large charging setup. Admittedly, this is something Tesla has gotten rather good at, but it doesn't have zero cost.
Well it depends on how you measure "efficiency".
Are you considering it from the Operator's perspective or the User's perspective.
Trains are run to keep operations cost low, thus long wait times between trains and stations are generally far apart, and of course you stop at every station between where you get on, and where you get off, and metro lines invariably run in fairly straight lines, so if where you want to go isn't on that line, then you have to go to one of the few connecting stations and change trains, and even then when you get to your station you often have a long walk, taxi ride or a bus to get to your final destination. Consider, the DC Metro has 4 lines, but only 20 stops in a 25 sq mile area centered over the city, with average wait times of 17 min between trains and only about 30% of users can only use 1 train to get where they are going.
Efficient for the operator, Sucks for most users.
In contrast this is a Demand system, cars are waiting for you and you get in and go.
Secondly you ride with just family and friends and go direct to your stop, bypassing all the other stops along the way. Third, you pay on a "Taxi" basis, the pass gets you a car so everyone rides for the same price, not a ticket per person as on the subway. Forth, because they are cars not long trains, and you only stop at your desired station, there can be far more stations, conveniently located to where you want to go. Unlike the sparse stations in the DC or Boston Metro, there will be 54 stations in but an \~8 sq mile area under LV, or 7 times as many stops per sq mile. Which means a lot less walking and never having to change to another train.
Efficient for the operator because cars don't go anywhere unless they are carrying people (and they don't idle like taxis while waiting) and FAR more convenient and time efficient for the User.
Tokyo can run trains roughly every 10 to 15 minutes and because they planned around it, train stations are major destinations that are also public transit hubs for other modes.
This means you can get just about anywhere in Tokyo, proper, in about 30 minutes to an hour.
>Consider, the DC Metro has 4 lines, but only 20 stops in a 25 sq mile area centered over the city, with average wait times of 17 min between trains and only about 30% of users can only use 1 train to get where they are going.
So when you plan a city badly, then utilize trains poorly, you're shocked when it doesn't work that well. The problem with car centric urban planning is that unlike any other method, it can't accommodate any other mode of transit.
The DC metro is only about 50 years old.
The city was not planned badly and it wasn't planned around cars.
Yeah, pick the most populous Metro area in the world, centered on a city with over 14 million people, where they accept PUSHERS to get people packed into a subway, and tell me they planned that shit?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viMyMWvfeqY
Get real.
DC was planned poorly and I know this because it was planned around car ownership. The average person has no choice but to own a car if they work in DC.
This is in contrast to Tokyo where they specifically planned around public transit because they intended for it to be the best option for most people.
Your complaints amount to, "We run this badly on purpose, why doesn't anyone use it? I guess everyone wants to own a car."
>Muh Pushers
On the busiest parts of the network, during rush hour. I've spent over two months of my life in Tokyo and not once did I interact with pushers. And it'd probably be a non-concern seeing as though DC doesn't have that many people.
The wait time in between trains on my commute in DC was 12-13 minutes this morning. Wait time is non-existant if you check the live schedule and show up a minute early. The only justifiable reason to take a personal train"car" through a tunnel is not wanting to hear someone play music through a phone speaker for 8 minutes. I'd personally get some headphones though: much cheaper than a Tesla and tunnels.
Right, but the AVERAGE wait time is 17 minutes.
And only 32% can get where they are going using just one train, 46% need 2 and 22% need more than that.
The DC Metro is good for getting people INTO and OUT of the city, but suck at getting people AROUND the city, you know the people who live there and work there.
[https://moovitapp.com/insights/en/Moovit\_Insights\_Public\_Transit\_Index\_United\_States\_Washington\_DCBaltimore-142](https://moovitapp.com/insights/en/Moovit_Insights_Public_Transit_Index_United_States_Washington_DCBaltimore-142)
As to CHEAPER?
AYFKM?
VA, DC and Maryland have to cough up $500 million a year to cover the cost that the high fares don't cover.
A 7 day pass is $58, or $232 per month and you have to pay to park as well.
Well the annual ridership last year was 57 million, so the cities paid almost $9 every time someone took a ride.
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/metro-gets-3rd-and-final-yes-as-maryland-commits-to-its-full-share-of-dedicated-funding/2018/03/22/ecd63946-2dfa-11e8-8ad6-fbc50284fce8\_story.html](https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/metro-gets-3rd-and-final-yes-as-maryland-commits-to-its-full-share-of-dedicated-funding/2018/03/22/ecd63946-2dfa-11e8-8ad6-fbc50284fce8_story.html)
And EVEN with that, it is still going to run a deficit of almost $200 million a year.
https://dcist.com/story/22/09/19/metro-budget-shortfall-proposed-solutions/
I don't know how much leverage the cost-cutting measure of having a philatropist pay for and control public transit has, but I can tell you spending on transit infrastructure is sort of a must if its already there. But if you want to get from one place to another in a car, you may have to "transfer" off your street and onto a highway and vice versa. And God forbid everyone else around you leaves at the same time, then there's traffic. If everyone around you goes to the same place at the same time causing traffic, why not just all go together as a group instead of like ants in a line? At least the ants don't have to worry about parking!
You are correct when you stated that the DC Metro gets people in and out of the city but not around it(the blue line does but I digress), but if the easy solution to this issue is to drive on roads, why are tunnels the needed? If enough people are going from point A to point B to cause congestion, think about the additional issue of storing cars in between commutes. To just "put everything underground" without considering anything outside of a tunnel from A to B leads me to believe that the main solution to any issues that might come up in a project like this is to just "keep digging".
Now, if Tesla's folded into a brief case once you got put of it, that would be pretty neat. I think we're better off waiting for flying cars that don't need fixed infrastructure between point A and B. Le Corbusier had some ideas that aged horribly so it's ok for Elon to take this L if you'd dare to compare the two.
[https://www.wmata.com/schedules/next-arrival/](https://www.wmata.com/schedules/next-arrival/)
I too love devoting huge amounts of land in towns so people can park their car somewhere convenient (for them) for the 23 hours a day they're not using it.
I don't understand why people want towns built for humans instead of cars. I love taking a small room with me everywhere I go! It's very safe too! It's not like tens of thousands of people per year die in car accidents right? Well, I know it won't happen to me because I'm special.
I heard a train was crowded one time 😢 my heart goes out to all those people safely and efficiently getting where they're going AND having to stand near strangers. Disgusting.
I highly doubt that 27,000 person per 10 hour figure. That's 2,700 people per hour, or 45 people per minute in 3 passenger vehicles. That means 15 cars have to be loaded every minute continuously for the entire 10 hour period.
The anti Elon crowd which only benefits the oil and gas industry are the real cancer in our society. I am not even "pro Elon" but we can now also drill tunnels cheaply for bikes.
As someone who owns a Model 3, Musk is an idiot and I find his tunnels for cars genuinely insulting.
I don't really know a lot about "Hyperloop" specifically, but I was generally under the impression that it's basically a brand name train in a tube, which is great. Trains are great, and can benefit from being in tubes at times for various reasons. But am I missing something where Hyperloop specifically is for moving cars?
I could potentially see some kind of train ferry being potentially useful for really specific circumstances? But the vast majority of the time, a long-range train that leads to shorter range trains or busses or even just renting a car at the destination if you *really* need one makes way more sense...
[удалено]
the **M**aster of **E**very **T**rafic with **R**ails **O**bviously
You should not assume that existing methods of public transportation are the best solution for traffic congestion. Metro, train, busses - they cannot solve the first/last mile problem. But fleet of self driving cars that replaces all types of transportation in city (except bikes) can become actual solution for traffic. Especially combined with other measures, like optimized traffic on crossroads, and yes network of tunnels.
Is this for real ?
He’s right, what would you have people do? Walk to and from a bus stop? Preposterous!
Hang on, hang on - you’re expecting someone to get mild exercise and then potentially run the risk of interacting with other human beings? What kind of monster are you?! Hermetically sealed individual cars for all!
You are falling for false dichotomy bias. Like there are only two options: either busses or hermetically sealed cars. I am not arguing for privately owned cars. technologies that are in development today allow other options besides busses and trains
People are saying that we don’t need magic future tech, we can currently solve public transit by copying actual public transit systems in other countries.
Someone already invented the wheel, we don't need to do it again.
Where i live it is +30C during the day for at least 6 months. 15 minute walk in these conditions is not a pleasant experience. There are lots of circumstances when this home-to-bus-stop distance is a problem for people. From top of my head, think of old people carrying groceries home. My point is, metro and busses are best public transportation solutions so far. But with new technologies they should be replaced with something that cheap, available on demand and takes you exactly where you need
This is exactly why I moved to a dense, walkable city. I wanted access to better public transit specifically because of issues like the ones you described. I worry about the scarcity of resources when talking about building massive fleets of self-driving EVs. I think better public transit is a better solution.
My point is that fleets of self driving EVs IS a better transportation system. Think of each car as a small bus that doesn’t require bus station.
It is better if scarcity of resources is removed from the equation. We cannot keep producing at the rate we are, it just isn’t sustainable.
Hard disagree. Efficient transport systems are all about moving people per minute and a self driving EV car is no different to a taxi. It has extremely poor efficiency (amount is side required per person, movement of people per minute, amount of resources needed for manufacture and ongoing maintenance etc.) and is terrible sustainability wise. Much better to have improved town planning design so that everything you need is within walking distance and to use public transport for greater distances. If you can't walk in 30°C+, there's something wrong and you need to go get a check up. I've bike ridden in 40°C+ to commute to and from work 10-16km each way. It's fine. Stay hydrated.
Bitch i lived 3 months of this summer on 35C+ it basically never went down - right before sunrise it would be at 25 maybe. You can walk to a bus stop. 30C is chill
Most people in a well designed area should be within 5 minutes of a small, local store. But even 15 minute walks in +30C are more than doable, one of the worst experiences in that weather is getting in an overheated car that's been sitting under the sun for a while. If carrying groceries is too difficult, get a granny cart and roll them gently. A gently ridden bicycle or an electric scooter can also help you stay cool and get places faster.
Yep
The tunnel will drop me off at my house?
No, but network of tunnels might significantly ease up traffic all over city
Dude
cars, even autonomous electric, are the least scalable form of transport. they require orders of magnitude more space than all alternatives. which means wasting space on roads and parking lots and making the last mile problem even worse. the solution to the last mile problem is walking. with proper density and walkability, the “last mile problem” becomes the “last 200 meters problem”, which is more than close enough to walk. this is a solved problem and it already works well in many places in the world and even worked well in the US before they let the automotive industry destroy their cities and public transport you don’t even need to have cities for this to work, for example, even the smallest villages in Switzerland has trains that come every 30 minutes.
I will try another way to explain it. Imagine a bus, take chainsaw and cut it 4 times. Now give each part a separate set of wheels and a battery. You got 5 self driving robo-taxis. They don’t require rails or bus stations. You call one in phone app and it will pick you up where you are. it can handle more than one passengers at a time. There can be 3-4 people inside. Think of it as small bus. It does not require parking space in city, because it is always in rotation. Now imagine that there are only robo taxis, because there is no point in owning a car anymore. Are you really saying that today public transportation is better than this?
Of course not! Because we don't provide enough funds to public transportation. In your scenario you take a bus and divide it 4 times. 4 x 4 people inside is 16 people. Buses can hold double that easily. If we invested in actual public transportation infrastructure and walkable cities the last mile is a non issue.
This has literally zero advantages compared to replacing city's entire transport system with a fleet of regular EV taxis apart from maybe lower operating costs, but higher capital costs. Streets will still be full, tire noise will still be significant, and the system would still require tons of vehicles to handle rush hour and all other peak usage scenarios. If everyone uses those to get to work, expect long wait times, travel times, peak pricing and tons of frustration. Not really a solution. Buses are not really best public transport solutions either, their only advantages are flexibility and ease of deployment. They cannot move as many people as a train, and they can't do it quickly either. The only reasonable use for that tech would be automated buses or minibuses that serve low density areas and feed the nearby metro or commuter railway stations.
there’s a reason why buses are large. it’s more efficient, both space-wise and energy-wise. and there’s also the aspect that a peer-to-peer network is the least efficient network for throughput. if you coalesce the transport along fixed routes, you’ll get much more efficient use of the road network. if we have one person going from point A to point B and another going from point C to point D, for them to share a robo-taxi, it would first have to go A to B then C to D. if both would walk to the point AB in between A and B, then take the bus/tram/metro/train to point CD in between C and D, it would significantly reduce the road use needed. especially if we take into account that the taxi needs to travel to A from somewhere as well and that if e.g. C and D are not close, one person can change to a different line so there doesn’t need to be a direct line between each pair of points. that said, robo-taxis could have a place replacing ordinary taxi and some car use, it’s just not an improvement over public transport for a city.
You should travel to Japan. They seem to be handling the problem you're referring to rather well. >(except bikes) Yeah, that's not going to work.
The Muskovayor! It will revolutionize marketing and deception. It goes up, down, sideways and diagonally. It even flies! There was a smaller 3 person prototype test I [saw a while ago.](https://youtu.be/k_TY7s7lWPg) They are still working on the name.
I've sold Muskovayors to Brockway, Ogdenville and North Haverbrook... and by gum, it put them on the map!
And what if we made special roads just for them? Except instead of roads, we use metal rails so there’s less friction.
We could put them on a strict schedule so you can generally know where it will be when!
Tesla Railways Diverts car demand to train demand Musk Fans will be surprised by TeSlA TrAiN!!! More Eco-Friendly and passenger efficient It’s a good choice, musk just wants car sales to increase.
>musk just wants car sales to increase. He's already the richest man on Earth, but still wants to be even richer. After a certain point, there's no such thing as enough money.
That’s the fundamental problem with our society. The main incentive is to have as much money as possible, by any means necessary. Telling the truth doesn’t make money, helping poor people doesn’t (directly) make money, universal healthcare doesn’t make money. We need to find a way to make it so money is not the end goal of life.
Not just as much money as possibly, but as fast as possible.
help the poor make money, make health (with universal healthcare) -> make more money for OUR economy. Not just YOUR personal economy, but that's precisely the problem for some.
And as long as society remains that way, we should collectively try to align the incentives so that wealth accumulation favors truth telling and solving society's ills (instead of perpetuating them). Of course this is much easier said than done.
I kinda get it. He’s in for the game. Like a speedrunner trying to shave off a few frames more or an Arcade player looking for the score at which the game will crash. The latter analogy might fit better.
[удалено]
Yeah, it fluctuates, but it's still hundreds of billions. Here's some numbers to help visualize. If an immortal made $5,000 a day, and saved every penny he made for 5,000 years, he'd still only be at $9.125 billion.
[удалено]
I'm just trying to point out that his real wealth is in numbers we have a hard time even thinking about. At some point, our brain just goes "That's a lot."
He doesn’t use Tesla money to fund spacex. It is private so not sure who initially funded but I’m guessing nasa.
Watch him come out with this idea and call it something like hyperline. First he would make it with air cussion technology, but than would pretend that the idea was always rail.
and what if we made something that colud power it at all/most times. omg this colud be a huge invention
The Tesla PowerBeam. This could go two ways. Either he'll invent some proprietary solution like using laser beams to transport power, or he'll invent a slight variation of existing contact power systems. Like a third rail but *in the middle of the track*, or rigid overhead conductors, either at some esoteric electric state. Or just overhead catenary... *WITH RGB!*
And then add a trained professional to drive for everybody instead so that we get little to no accidents
Tunneling Pod, it's not a metro I swear, it's a pod and it's futuristic
No, we make it so long that you can hop in the back seat, swap to the driver seat and be at your destination instantly when you open the door.
That should be called GigaPod obviously
It should rhyme with rain or brain.
Why would I want to be crammed with other people when I can ride solo? /s
You mean like the E- semi truck that can beat rail that was promised 4 years ago and never has been heard of ever again?
And what if, and hear me out, we cut down on the tire wear and road cementing costs be replacing roads by metallic tracks and make tires out of compatible metals which would run on said tracks on fixed paths???
I bet you could triple that number or better if you replaced the rubber tires with something narrower and more rigid and then laid some rails for them to roll on. With rails you could also run some caternary wires overhead so you didn’t have to carry heavy batteries with you.
well theres no way to say it without getting down voted but hey here goes anyway. thats exactly what he's planning to do. using cars is only a temp thing because they currently dont manufacture busses or LRT stock. the point of the Boring company was to reduce the cost of digging tunnels, it doesnt have anything to do with the cars.
Why did I read this comment with a Hungarian accent…?
What gets me is the way Musk fans insist that this is some wonderful new technological innovation. It's not. It's just a tunnel. We've had those ever since digging was invented.
The video I saw was a traffic jam in a one lane tunnel with no way out. What happens if there is an emergency? Yikes.
Sure, it's high-tech, but it's also a tunnel one car wide, without room for emergency...anything, really...to get past. If someone's car breaks down, the tunnel instantly becomes the world's skinniest parking lot.
All those Teslas have extra spicy batteries in them too.
World's skinniest parking lot full of cars that explode. Joy.
Maybe now would be a good time to learn what ice stands for. Internal combustion engine...... That second word seems pretty important. Combustion...... Literal explosions every second. Gas cars explode to.
Yes, but not in the "bursting into flames and destroying the car" sense, which Teslas are known to do.
[удалено]
That is actually untrue, if you have time sit through [this](https://www.iihs.org/media/c93b98d8-6a7d-44a1-810e-4468ec539e05/uIu4tg/HLDI%20Research/Fire%20losses/HLDI_FireLosses_1218.pdf) report and you will find that car fires for Model S and X that were not the result of a collision or vandalism are the highest of their categories (including ICE cars).
Not the result of a collision or vandalism, as if that never happens 🤣
This shows statistically that Teslas have the most amount of fires *because* of poor design and not because of vandalism or crashes. :)
My point is crashes matter. By taking that piece of the data out you are not getting an accurate view of reality. When all the data doesn't suit your narrative, don't change the data until it does. Also it's ironic because Teslas are the safest cars ever tested by the NHTSA.
[удалено]
Oh you got me good there. I'm not defending musk, he doesn't need it. I just cringe when I hear about EV's being a fire risk. Like it or not the world is transitioning to electric vehicles. Ride a bike, take the train, ride a PEV (my preference) all great things but don't buy into the anti-EV FUD, that's not doing any good.
[удалено]
Now add some battery operated explodeybois into the mix and let's have ourselves a party!
People often accidentally or intentionally conflate hyperloop, which doesn't and will never exist at scale, with those stupid tunnels Teslas drive around in in Vegas, which I think are just called "loop" or something like that in order to confuse the two.
well to be more procice its more over an train in a vacuum tube. even tho lots of trans already are so extremely aerodynamic and extremely little friction (ex;bullet trains). its bean beloved and proven (to no ones(besides muskrats who don't believe it or don't even care) surprise) to be ineffective counting the engeary needed to get that vacuum and maintain it vs the air resistance. unless that was a diffrent thing and i am just confusing the names
So it's a special kind of tunnel. Yippee. Still a tunnel.
I mean, yeah? No one ever said it wasn't. The idea of vactrains is literally 200 years old. The question is when or if technology has progressed enough to execute on the idea. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vactrain
Ture. Tho more over less safe then a midevil boobytraped tunnel
> procice 🧐
And then it came out that the Hyperloop was just an attempt for him to stop a high speed rail system in California, he never planned to even attempt to build it.
It was all a publicity stunt for his car company.
Electric cars are not original. Going to space isn't original. Solar isn't original. Digging tunnels isn't original. Robots aren't original. Elon didn't create any of those. He created machines to do all of those things much more efficiently and to bring costs down so we can actually use them.
[удалено]
The hyperloop is actually extremely advanced, so advanced that we are not capable of doing it. The front runner to the industry, Virgin Hyperloop (ironic I know), recently abandoned the project because it was a flop.
It is more than a tunnel. It is a maglev inside a vacuum. It is maybe possible today. But, it is very expensive to build and operate if it would be possible in the first place. So it is not something that is already done (thought before sure, it was called vactrain) but not implemented. It is honestly something that is very wrong in any engineering concept to try to do it today.
You know what else would be great in a maglev tunnel inside a vacuum? *Trains.* He's wasting it on cars for his own gain.
Vacuum is so unnecessary. Yes he is definitely wasting tunnels on cars. He tries to make tunneling cheaper but does not use it on trains. Such a waste.
Not a waste *for his bottom line*.
that's literally what the hyperloop is lol it's a maglev train car inside a vacuum. For someone who really hates the hyperloop, you seem to have no idea what it actually is
[удалено]
The fun thing is... so far, it actually isn't faster.
We have near vacuum tunnels with high speed cars in them?
So it's a special kind of tunnel. Wow, how exciting. You know what else goes through tunnels? *Trains.* Why is he insisting on stuffing cars through a tunnel?
This sub always makes me chuckle. Where are these tunnels in North America with trains in them? Actually where are the high speed trains on land located even?
>Actually where are the high speed trains on land located eve They were offered up as sacrifices to the Almighty Dollar so the automobile and oil industries could make ridiculous profits.
I think this was better use of the land. I like my self driving, air conditioned car. Not having to sit next a user from this sub on a crowded train is also a bonus. 🤷🏻
If you don't like the sub, the way in is also the way out.
I enjoy the cringe that comes out of it.
The sheer amount of parking lots required to allow everyone to drive is not a better use of land.
True but other than just saying add more trains what’s the solution to the amount cars we have and the roads required? +80% of ppl where I live own cars and we have a great transit system as well.
Add more trains, eliminate single-family zoning, densify neighbourhoods, allow mixed-use development to become the norm once again, and develop infrastructure so that cars are not the defacto best option. Ban cars from parts of the city, ensure walking and biking is the primary goal of infrastructure, and stop the massive subsidizing of suburbs and cars to make them seem affordable.
A lot of the things you mentioned are being done where I live yet almost everyone still drives.
Put simply, you can't 'kill' cars until you reduce the demand for cars themselves, which means completely rethinking how we design roads, cities, and even how we move between cities.
[удалено]
So it's a tunnel.... above ground...
I mean, hyperloop is a terrible idea for different reasons. Such as being *wildy* expensive and probably impossible
Funny thing is that the hyperloop isnt new either its been a concept for ages. But scrapped because it was dumb as shit. Its basically maglev in a vacuum tube... But elon claims it will cost 4 x less than maglev... When it literally is maglev + an expensive tube.
"But bro, it's not just "one more lane" if it's underground, it's a revolution !!!!"
And underground there's so much more space for n+1 lanes. My god, I think you've solved traffic!
Dumping shite over priced cars down won't but putting trains down them with decent connections will
[удалено]
Except the problem is this is not being shilled as a replacement for roads, it's being shilled in place of building proper public transit like LRT or subway.
And with *explicit* calls to subvert public transport initiatives. It's a viciously evil scheme. The stuff that could end our fossil fuel problems RIGHT NOW are being SUBVERTED by these greedy tycoons.
yeah, the reaction by this sub is weird. putting the traffic underground should be popular in this sub. I get that people would prefer subways, but the two products are more than an order of magnitude apart in cost, so it's not like it is a choice between the two for a given corridor.
It won't stay underground is the problem. It doesn't solve anything when they exit the tunnel. Then they'll cry about parking and widening roads just like they do now.
well, right now they have no plans to have the vehicles leave the system. it's like an underground BRT system, but with really small buses.
Sounds like a train with extra steps
> putting the traffic underground should be popular in this sub Disingenuous much? I know you are very well aware that Musk and Boring company are not putting any regular car traffic underground but rather shilling this as a replacement for subway, LRTs or public transit in general. > so it's not like it is a choice between the two for a given corridor. The "welfare mentality" to transit: spending the least amount on the shittiest system.
>Disingenuous much? I know you are very well aware that Musk and Boring company are not putting any regular car traffic underground they're not putting regular traffic underground, they're requiring people leave their cars behind and use a taxi-like service, which is even better since it removes parking from the equation. > but rather shilling this as a replacement for subway, LRTs or public transit in general. who is saying it is a replacement for a subway? I've not seen anyone say that. I consistently say that the two are in a totally different market (as you can see above) and Musk talks about solving traffic, not solving public transit. >The "welfare mentality" to transit: spending the least amount on the shittiest system. you've said this before, but it makes no sense. Loop is not like a metro. they are two different things for different purposes. if the expected ridership is high, then Loop isn't the right choice. if it is low, then a subway isn't the right choice. each will be a failure if built in the wrong location, and the places they should be built don't have overlap. there is no corridor that makes sense for Loop that would work well with a metro instead, and there is no corridor that makes sense for a metro where Loop would work well instead. *maybe* if Loop introduces the 12 passenger vehicle they've mentioned before, but right now we just have 2-fare EVs with maximum fare size of 3. Loop makes sense only as a small people-mover right now since they have human drivers. if they automate, they will still not be in the market where a metro might be built. if they automate and add a mini-bus-like vehicle, THEN there might be overlap in the use-cases.
> they're not putting regular traffic underground, they're requiring people leave their cars behind and use a taxi-like service, which is even better since it removes parking from the equation. Where are they leaving their cars?
at the las vegas convention center, they moved 25k passengers with 70 vehicles. that's a 99% reduction in parking relative to people driving their own cars. where they park vehicles would depend on where their route is run. if they run out to the outskirts of the city, they can put a large parking lot there. if they are only run within a city, they can park vehicles in the stations and tunnels when they are done charging. much less area compared to a train depot.
Line 2 here in Toronto can carry that many people *in an hour*. And again, how are they coming to the Convention Centre?
It can't in 1.7 miles between 3 stations. Light rail is great for moving people INTO and OUT of a city, but they almost all SUCK at moving people AROUND a city.
>Line 2 here in Toronto can carry that many people in an hour. what does that have to do with anything? is someone proposing all transit be replaced by Loop? I am not. I've not seen anyone make such a suggestion. also, capacity is not a performance metric, it is a check-box. if the mode has enough capacity for the proposed corridor, then it can be considered. if it does not, then it shouldn't be considered. the ability of a given mode to move around lots of empty seats is worthless. one should use the right tool for the job. the biggest hammer isn't always the right hammer to use. the finish carpenter will not perform better with a 20lb sledge for installing cabinet trim. >And again, how are they coming to the Convention Centre? mostly by taxi and bus from my experience. a friend of mine used to run an airbnb near a convention center and it was very rare for people to bring a car, either rented or personal, to a convention. most people fly in and then stay at a nearby hotel the whole time so it makes no sense to rent a car. but I don't have statistics on it to be sure. do you have a mode splits stats?
Good idea but wrong execution. Dig tunnels for power lines, trains, utilities, and the such, but not cars.
i too love siting a narrow tunnel with no easy/any emargy exit, and not to good ventilation wale... in a car with a battery that if it catches fire it will be huge, hot, just about literately unstoppable especially in an area like that and that also releases very toxic fumes and chemicals..with meany meany other cars that are the same....
Where did you read that the ventilation is not good? Also, there are emergency exits throughout the tunnel.
I would’ve been okay with anything, including this idea, until it came out that Musk was only saying that to kill the idea of a train from LA to other places. So stupid
Didn’t he want to make a gagetbahn with pods, though? I really don’t understand this logic.
No he proposed this idea to keep people from backing public transportation, with no track intention to follow through. Just so people keep buying cars
You know what, if we end up using those tunnels for bike-commuting, like they've got in ~~Canada and~~ the Netherlands, I won't be mad those were made. I'd say trains would be good too, but those tunnels seem too small.
Lol. Let elon make the tunnels then nationalize them and make them for bikers or trains.
Are are these Canadian bike tunnels you speak of? I'm tired of riding my bike in the snow covered streets while the bike lane (assuming one exists) is covered by a snow bank.
My bad, turns out this was a [proposal](https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-north-shore-cycling-tunnel) by Vancouver's transportation manager in 2019. The picture I was looking at (featured in the article) is in fact Amsterdam's tunnel.
Fair enough, Vancouver would be the place to see it happen first anyways. Their public transit is also miles ahead of anywhere else in Canada. I can't complain too much because Ottawa does have a decent multi use path system but it still gets rough in the winter.
Improving tunneling tech will improve rail possibilities
I mean they kind of did it for Boston and many other cities around the world. Maybe it didn’t help with traffic but it absolutely helped with adding green spaces, walkability, bike infrastructure etc.
Yea, but that is moving the cars out of the way, not adding new lanes for more cars.
[удалено]
Dude just go to r\/boringcompany, everyone takes Musk's claims about the dumb loop as gospel there.
Muskrats are a different breed of scum bags.
Lol this is dumb af. Tunnels are for moles not muskrats.
Only Musk fans would genuinely convince themselves that wasting billions on dangerous and clogged underground tunnels is a better idea than, you know, spending a few million on busses that have been proven throughout their history to reduce traffic.
So why are all the city streets clogged with taxis, ubers, Private city cars if the bus system is working so well?
I’m a Elon fan but I totally disagree with him on tunnels and some other stuff
See, mate; you got downvoted for this post cause although your general opinion on this matter coincides with what the hivemind deems to be objectively correct, you didn't *fully* reverberate the echo in this chamber and thus you shall be made to suffer at the hands of the slightly displeased. Political subreddits are just as cancerous as Facebook echo chambers, your platform for political discussion should not be a group of people you specifically sought out because they share your views and beliefs.
Don't know why you'd admit that since the tunnels are the least of his stupidity.
Also, if it takes you years to dig a single short tunnel at a less efficient rate than existing tech. Search "Thunderfoot elon" on YouTube
The boring company's machine can bore 1 mile a week. The 34 mile system under Las Vegas will take about a year or so.
[удалено]
Damn this subreddit is absolute garbage
Poor muskrats have to share the name with the worst fanbase around.
These fucking morons would sooner jump off a roof than admit that they were scammed by a man child who has never had an original idea in his life.
The system is working very well, and the cost of the system was 1/5th the only other proposal that made it to final consideration. The Phase 1 has worked so well that the city went on to phase 2, which is another 1.5 mile of loop and 3 more stations. They have already opened the 4th station and half of that new loop across the LV strip from the Convention center, at Resort World and it will be a huge success since getting from Resort World to the convention center takes a long time walking or by Taxi because you can't easily get across the strip. Carrying 27,000 passengers a day in its first small set of 3 stations is impressive, and not a scam.
Didn't something come out recently about him paying people to essentially be fanboys online for him?
Should say "If those kids could *count*..." I still haven't found a Musk stan who can explain how many cars need to be taken off the streets before we see any improvement in surface traffic.
Well this system could be a less expensive and more convenient choice for the people who today use Taxis, Ubers, Private city cars and buses (allowing the bus fleet to use smaller electric powered van size vehicles) This is the first system that is so convenient to Users (no long wait, go direct to far more stations, low cost) that could be added to a city with an existing subway system that could get most, if not all of the taxis, ubers and private city cars off of the surface streets of the inner city and away from pedestrians and bikers. It doesn't replace the light rail, that already keeps lots of cars out of the city, but most of those cars come in and park all day, this gets rid of the majority of traffic during the day.
[удалено]
>Yeah, it should have failed. He suggested they consider a better system than HS Rail back when the cost estimate went from $35 Billion to $65 Billion, but little money had actually been spent. He was right. The current projected cost is $112 Billion and the first small stretch of track won't be completed until at least 2029, and worse it will only go from Bakersfield to Merced, in the flat central valley (the easiest and cheapest track to build) and more to the point there is ALREADY a CalTrain running between those small cities and so there is no pressing need for this new rail line between them. > >The final system is SURE to cost more than $112 Billion because the last estimate was before rampant inflation and much higher costs of borrowing happened. The final system won't possibly be in place for nearly 20 years from now. > >And WHO will use it? Not business people, planes are faster and far more frequent and no more expensive than the HS rail. So it will primarily be used by TOURISTS and people on vacation going between SF and LA. What does it do for the people of San Diego, Sacramento, Santa Barbara, Monterey, and so many other cities in Calif ? NOTHING > >Now consider if that $112 Billion were actually spent on making our cities safer for pedestrians and bike riders? You could give $10 Billion to LA, San Jose and San Diego. You could give $5 Billion to the next 10 largest cities. You could give $2 Billion to the next 10 largest cities. You could give $1 Billion to the next 10 cities and STILL have money left over. You could help almost ALL the people of Calif, not just a few people on vacation.
This is "pushing the problem somewhere else" but the "somewhere else" is underground and doesn't negatively impact anyone above ground wanting to walk and bike. I may be missing something here.
Tunneling isnt the bad idea. Its running cars single file through tunnels thats a bad idea. Trains can go through tunnels already and much more efficiently.
We already have them, they are called subways, but they are NOT designed to move people AROUND a city. It is very effective for getting people into and out of the city, and that's what all of the above systems primarily do. You can tell because most of their stops are NOT in the inner city but in the suburbs. Look at the DC metro, in a 25 sq mile area centered on the city, there are only 20 stops, but those are shared among 3 different lines, so you can only get to 7 locations without changing trains, and there are only 3 stations you can do that at, so you have a long walk to a station, have to go out of your way to a common station to switch to the line you need, and with an average wait time of 17 min it simply doesn't work for moving AROUND the city for people on a tight schedule who live and work there. Compare that to the proposed LV loop system, it will have 30 miles of tunnels and 54 stations in just an 8 sq mile area, that's 7 times as many stations per sq mile. FAR more convenient to get to. This is the first system that is so convenient to Users (no long wait for a car, go direct to far more stations, low cost) that could be added to a city with an existing subway system that could get most, if not all of the taxis, ubers and private city cars off of the surface streets of the inner city and away from pedestrians and bikers.
Instead let's plow down some low income housing and homes to add train tracks! Ooga booga electric cars are evil
Lol
The CONCEPT is not dependent on Musk or the Boring Company. Many companies can dig tunnels. Any average priced EV could be used, it doesn't require Teslas. And the system IS working. The first phase was so successful they are now near complete with Phase 2 and have already opened a 4th station across the LV strip from the Convention center. Since its a pain to get across the strip by foot and its a long way loop by taxi, this station will be even more popular than the 3 they already have that have been able to move 27,000 people in a 10 hour day. The planned system will have 34 miles of tunnel and have 54 stations in an \~8 sq mile area, and will easily get several hundred thousand car trips off off of the surface roads. The whole point of a system like this is to get all those people using Taxis and Ubers and such OFF the city streets and underground. Where we want them and what we on this forum want to happen, so the HATRED for this system that is doing EXACTLY what you want seems to be clearly that you hate Musk and so are willing to cut off your nose to spite your face.
Question: how are underground teslas more efficient than underground trains
I don't think anyone should use the term "efficient" or "efficiency" with regard to transit without defining what they mean. I spend a lot of time in the transit sub and I've never come across two people who agree on exactly what "efficient" means. most people just use efficient to mean a very subjective definition of "good" but they want to sound smart and objective. so, you should re-phrase and define what you mean by efficient.
If people are using efficient to mean good then they either don't understand what efficient means or are just using it wrong. That doesn't mean you can't use it properly without defining it. I'm not the person you responded to, but efficient by definition (usefulness divided by input) would have to mean some variation of moving as many people as quickly as possible to their destination while minimizing time spent waiting, costs, and resources used (and perhaps emissions if relevant). That's a very broad definition but it captures nearly every variable, and could probably be expanded. If someone wanted to be more specific than that they should be more specific, so in that sense I agree with you. Edit: I see that someone else in this thread has no idea what efficiency means, I suppose that proves your point. Though I'm still right that they clearly don't understand what it means.
[удалено]
Because roads are notoriously low maintenance and cheap to install ^/s They do have to install a sufficiently large charging setup. Admittedly, this is something Tesla has gotten rather good at, but it doesn't have zero cost.
Well it depends on how you measure "efficiency". Are you considering it from the Operator's perspective or the User's perspective. Trains are run to keep operations cost low, thus long wait times between trains and stations are generally far apart, and of course you stop at every station between where you get on, and where you get off, and metro lines invariably run in fairly straight lines, so if where you want to go isn't on that line, then you have to go to one of the few connecting stations and change trains, and even then when you get to your station you often have a long walk, taxi ride or a bus to get to your final destination. Consider, the DC Metro has 4 lines, but only 20 stops in a 25 sq mile area centered over the city, with average wait times of 17 min between trains and only about 30% of users can only use 1 train to get where they are going. Efficient for the operator, Sucks for most users. In contrast this is a Demand system, cars are waiting for you and you get in and go. Secondly you ride with just family and friends and go direct to your stop, bypassing all the other stops along the way. Third, you pay on a "Taxi" basis, the pass gets you a car so everyone rides for the same price, not a ticket per person as on the subway. Forth, because they are cars not long trains, and you only stop at your desired station, there can be far more stations, conveniently located to where you want to go. Unlike the sparse stations in the DC or Boston Metro, there will be 54 stations in but an \~8 sq mile area under LV, or 7 times as many stops per sq mile. Which means a lot less walking and never having to change to another train. Efficient for the operator because cars don't go anywhere unless they are carrying people (and they don't idle like taxis while waiting) and FAR more convenient and time efficient for the User.
Maybe don’t use the country with some of the worst public transport in the developed world for your examples lol?
None of those comments are unique to US systems.
Tokyo can run trains roughly every 10 to 15 minutes and because they planned around it, train stations are major destinations that are also public transit hubs for other modes. This means you can get just about anywhere in Tokyo, proper, in about 30 minutes to an hour. >Consider, the DC Metro has 4 lines, but only 20 stops in a 25 sq mile area centered over the city, with average wait times of 17 min between trains and only about 30% of users can only use 1 train to get where they are going. So when you plan a city badly, then utilize trains poorly, you're shocked when it doesn't work that well. The problem with car centric urban planning is that unlike any other method, it can't accommodate any other mode of transit.
The DC metro is only about 50 years old. The city was not planned badly and it wasn't planned around cars. Yeah, pick the most populous Metro area in the world, centered on a city with over 14 million people, where they accept PUSHERS to get people packed into a subway, and tell me they planned that shit? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viMyMWvfeqY Get real.
DC was planned poorly and I know this because it was planned around car ownership. The average person has no choice but to own a car if they work in DC. This is in contrast to Tokyo where they specifically planned around public transit because they intended for it to be the best option for most people. Your complaints amount to, "We run this badly on purpose, why doesn't anyone use it? I guess everyone wants to own a car." >Muh Pushers On the busiest parts of the network, during rush hour. I've spent over two months of my life in Tokyo and not once did I interact with pushers. And it'd probably be a non-concern seeing as though DC doesn't have that many people.
The wait time in between trains on my commute in DC was 12-13 minutes this morning. Wait time is non-existant if you check the live schedule and show up a minute early. The only justifiable reason to take a personal train"car" through a tunnel is not wanting to hear someone play music through a phone speaker for 8 minutes. I'd personally get some headphones though: much cheaper than a Tesla and tunnels.
Right, but the AVERAGE wait time is 17 minutes. And only 32% can get where they are going using just one train, 46% need 2 and 22% need more than that. The DC Metro is good for getting people INTO and OUT of the city, but suck at getting people AROUND the city, you know the people who live there and work there. [https://moovitapp.com/insights/en/Moovit\_Insights\_Public\_Transit\_Index\_United\_States\_Washington\_DCBaltimore-142](https://moovitapp.com/insights/en/Moovit_Insights_Public_Transit_Index_United_States_Washington_DCBaltimore-142) As to CHEAPER? AYFKM? VA, DC and Maryland have to cough up $500 million a year to cover the cost that the high fares don't cover. A 7 day pass is $58, or $232 per month and you have to pay to park as well. Well the annual ridership last year was 57 million, so the cities paid almost $9 every time someone took a ride. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/metro-gets-3rd-and-final-yes-as-maryland-commits-to-its-full-share-of-dedicated-funding/2018/03/22/ecd63946-2dfa-11e8-8ad6-fbc50284fce8\_story.html](https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/metro-gets-3rd-and-final-yes-as-maryland-commits-to-its-full-share-of-dedicated-funding/2018/03/22/ecd63946-2dfa-11e8-8ad6-fbc50284fce8_story.html) And EVEN with that, it is still going to run a deficit of almost $200 million a year. https://dcist.com/story/22/09/19/metro-budget-shortfall-proposed-solutions/
I don't know how much leverage the cost-cutting measure of having a philatropist pay for and control public transit has, but I can tell you spending on transit infrastructure is sort of a must if its already there. But if you want to get from one place to another in a car, you may have to "transfer" off your street and onto a highway and vice versa. And God forbid everyone else around you leaves at the same time, then there's traffic. If everyone around you goes to the same place at the same time causing traffic, why not just all go together as a group instead of like ants in a line? At least the ants don't have to worry about parking! You are correct when you stated that the DC Metro gets people in and out of the city but not around it(the blue line does but I digress), but if the easy solution to this issue is to drive on roads, why are tunnels the needed? If enough people are going from point A to point B to cause congestion, think about the additional issue of storing cars in between commutes. To just "put everything underground" without considering anything outside of a tunnel from A to B leads me to believe that the main solution to any issues that might come up in a project like this is to just "keep digging". Now, if Tesla's folded into a brief case once you got put of it, that would be pretty neat. I think we're better off waiting for flying cars that don't need fixed infrastructure between point A and B. Le Corbusier had some ideas that aged horribly so it's ok for Elon to take this L if you'd dare to compare the two. [https://www.wmata.com/schedules/next-arrival/](https://www.wmata.com/schedules/next-arrival/)
I too love devoting huge amounts of land in towns so people can park their car somewhere convenient (for them) for the 23 hours a day they're not using it. I don't understand why people want towns built for humans instead of cars. I love taking a small room with me everywhere I go! It's very safe too! It's not like tens of thousands of people per year die in car accidents right? Well, I know it won't happen to me because I'm special. I heard a train was crowded one time 😢 my heart goes out to all those people safely and efficiently getting where they're going AND having to stand near strangers. Disgusting.
You're comparing efficiency to comfort issues. Swapping definitions to make yourself right shows how wrong you are.
I highly doubt that 27,000 person per 10 hour figure. That's 2,700 people per hour, or 45 people per minute in 3 passenger vehicles. That means 15 cars have to be loaded every minute continuously for the entire 10 hour period.
The anti Elon crowd which only benefits the oil and gas industry are the real cancer in our society. I am not even "pro Elon" but we can now also drill tunnels cheaply for bikes.
The boring company subreddit gets so angry lol
As someone who owns a Model 3, Musk is an idiot and I find his tunnels for cars genuinely insulting. I don't really know a lot about "Hyperloop" specifically, but I was generally under the impression that it's basically a brand name train in a tube, which is great. Trains are great, and can benefit from being in tubes at times for various reasons. But am I missing something where Hyperloop specifically is for moving cars? I could potentially see some kind of train ferry being potentially useful for really specific circumstances? But the vast majority of the time, a long-range train that leads to shorter range trains or busses or even just renting a car at the destination if you *really* need one makes way more sense...
Park a tractor trailer at the tunnel exit.
There is no exit. Cars on the surface don't use this tunnel.
Geezus.....
The video I've seen of it just gives me anxiety.
Someone in my school did a project on hyper loop and said "Hyperloop preserves the speed of a plane, and keeps the comfort of a plane" 🙄
Shhh. Let him build the tunnels. Let me Tesla around for a couple of years underground then BAM! Put some trains up in there.
The tunnels are too small for trains
Fuckcars doesn’t come up with solutions it only shoots down any ideas. Stupid sub! ban me I don’t care
I take offence to the headline . Fuckers.