The link you provided is cut, ends in "..." But yea, you nailed it. 68 billion for the bullet train? Whew. For less than 10% of the cost, you could revolutionize transportation. The only thing I wonder, is 840 passengers per hour enough? That isn't nearly enough traffic. How many thousands travel between LA and San Fran every day?Assuming an average departure time of 2 minutes between capsules, a
minimum of 28 passengers per capsule are required to meet 840 passengers per
hour. It is possible to further increase the Hyperloop capacity by reducing the
time between departures. The current baseline requires up to 40 capsules in
activity during rush hour, 6 of which are at the terminals for loading and
unloading of the passengers in approximately 5 minutes.
Strange it didn't work, but this one does: http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/hyperloop_alpha-201... It actually is. He addressed it in the paper, but the current yearly number of travelers between them is 6 million people. This facilitates 7 million and some change. He also noted that this would obviously increase the desire to make that trip, and the Hyperloop is capable of increasing the number of passengers as that occurs.That isn't nearly enough traffic. How many thousands travel between LA and San Fran every day?
I would be interested in knowing capacity vs need. How many can fit in the vessel etc. Also, you can't define "need" just in the terms of how many people currently travel from LA to SFO. This type of speed and reduced cost will have people flying in to SFO to go to surrounding areas as well. Also, demand will increase with lower cost and quicker ease of travel. Got to think big, cross country travel. I see some eminent domain in the future of this and eventually LA to NYC. LA and SFA is a good start though.