Hacker News Reader

Comment by toddmorey | Hacker News Reader

How is that any worse than standard commercial air travel? Plus, really, you are talking about a thirty-minute journey.

The journeys currently envisioned by the hyperloop are more appropriate for trains, and Acela (for example) is actually pretty roomy

I don't think Acela journeys are 30 minutes long, though.

You can get up and walk around on a plane.

Not for the first 30 minutes - which in this case is the entire trip.

I think one advantage of air travel is it's distracting. Busy flight attendants, announcements from pilots, plane moving to the runway, taking off... so there's less reason to concentrate on the lack of space while stuck in the seat.

I'm sure the seatbacks would all have some net connected display for movies or actual computing.

Are you? I wouldn't rule it out, but personally I think getting an outside signal into a sealed capsule which is moving so rapidly that it must use battery power rather than a physically connected power source seems more than trivial.

You can yak on your cellphone (or watch movies on your tablet) for the entire 35 minutes of this journey.

Nah, wifi would travel great in a long metal tube.

For 300 miles? Or are you proposing spacing hubs out along the journey, in which case, wouldn't frequent reconnection be an issue?

In this case it looks like you could have a great view.

What do you mean? Hyperloop capsules have no windows.

Not to mention the tube is steel, which isn't traditionally light-permeable.

His proposal includes "entertainment displays", so there is some sort of built in distraction technology.

Great point.

In THIS case. What if this becomes standardized and more routes are hooked up?

Most flights I've been on in the last decade, you don't want to leave your seat for anything except a bathroom break. It's not like we're flying on Pan Am Clippers with pianos and seven course meals. Air travel is a glorified cattle car unless you're willing to be financially raped for first class or a chartered jet.

But you could.

The hop between two major cities where I live (~800km apart) takes around 50 minutes on a plane. For 15 minutes you can't get up, and for the remainder low altitudes keep the seatbelt sign on due to turbulence.

For the advantage of a short journey people will put up with it, especially if it can get you to the centre of the city rather than an airport on the outskirts.

What airlines are you flying on?

I rarely fly. I have used British Airways, Cathay Pacific and Easy Jet.

I'd rather be stuck in my seat for 35 minutes than to travel to an airport, go through security, check-in, waiting and boarding, fly for 90 minutes and then apply all the logistics in the other end. Your point is valid, but I would contend that the total package is still superior.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com