The thing about hyperloop is that none of the technology is new...or even recent!
The pneumatic tube system in New York operated at substantially reduced fractions of the speed of sound, did not have an air-cushioned (or maglev'd) self-propelling capsule, did not operate in a partial vacuum, did not have human-sized capsules, and carried cargo with substantially different tolerances to acceleration.
This may be old technology but if you're stringing it together in radically different ways you need to do serious integration work and expect to run into problems. Pointing to the pneumatic tube system of early New York as a "demonstration system" is facetious.
Sure, integration is usually the hard part, but that's engineering for ya'. The point is that there's no new science at play. In other words, this is less like going from horse-and-buggy to the moon, and more like going from the Model T to F1.
Edit: Though it's worth noting that both those transitions were achieved in less time than since the original NYC pneumatic tubes and now.
Comments
The pneumatic tube system in New York operated at substantially reduced fractions of the speed of sound, did not have an air-cushioned (or maglev'd) self-propelling capsule, did not operate in a partial vacuum, did not have human-sized capsules, and carried cargo with substantially different tolerances to acceleration.
This may be old technology but if you're stringing it together in radically different ways you need to do serious integration work and expect to run into problems. Pointing to the pneumatic tube system of early New York as a "demonstration system" is facetious.
Sure, integration is usually the hard part, but that's engineering for ya'. The point is that there's no new science at play. In other words, this is less like going from horse-and-buggy to the moon, and more like going from the Model T to F1.
Edit: Though it's worth noting that both those transitions were achieved in less time than since the original NYC pneumatic tubes and now.