However its not such a big flaw, specially to warrant 63billion to alleviate.
Of course on many/most planes "first class" does not get you isolation from children... (certainly not for that low a price) but at least you get unlimited liquor and legroom. I'd be willing to pay more for a flight without children but I would want some unlimited liquor once I go over 200 or so.
On this note, what would be the booze situation on hyperloops? There isn't an aisle on those things as far as I can tell, which means no stewardesses... Maybe per-seat minibars could be installed on them? Strictly speaking it wouldn't be necessary for 30 minute rides, but I see no reason this idea shouldn't be scaled up past 30 minute trips (Musk points out that supersonic airliners are better at longer distances, but since we don't have those either I'd settle for a 30+ minute hyperloop. Both a hyperloop and a return of Concord/Tu-144 would be great of course.)
What is your thesis here, I shouldn't be annoyed by children because one day I will be old? Not sure I understand that logic. "Being annoyed" isn't even a proper choice; if I could turn it off, I certainly would. In fact, I would say that the ability to turn if off for a few hours at a time is worth about $50-100 to me......
Your post was about as useful as telling someone in a wheelchair to see a doctor to get their legs fixed (hey, it may be an indication of a serious medical problem!)
There's no new problem here.
> "If not using the bathroom for an hour is an issue "
"An hour". It's right there in his post. I didn't say there was any new problem. I didn't say I objected in any way to the Hyperloop. I specifically addressed his post which said "an hour". OK?
Update (since I've been downvoted):
All these buses analogy isn't exactly the same case because they still have the option to stop somewhere, which give the passengers the assurance that if they really can't hold it's not the end of the world. Taking that into consideration, I think it could solve most people's bathroom concern by adding bathroom stops to the loop, in the case of semi-emergency, ideally a pod should be able to make a stop upon request within 5-10 minutes without disrupting other pods. Some financial incentive might be needed for encouraging people to hold longer but I do see legal risks in that approach.
We're largely (70%) talking about commuters here, they're taking this twice a day, most days out of the year. Again, I'm not sure why for 90%+ of people that this would be an issue.
EDIT: a clarification for non-New Yorkers -- people take these daily to get to work, if they work in Manhattan. The alternative is SI railroad-ferry-subway, which allows more bathroom safety but takes quite a bit longer.
Even on a commuter bus or plane, if someone has a medical emergency and needs to get off right now, the bus will pull over or the plane will land. In this design you'd have to just sit there, helpless, until the vehicle reaches its destination. Heck, even if you're a doctor in the next seat you wouldn't be able to get up and help your fellow passenger.
The problem with emergencies at major airports is that between EMTs and fire services inspecting the jet, that runway is out of service for at least 30 minutes.
On a normal flight a 737 flies an approach at under 180kts but the approach limit is a lot faster. In a cardiac arrest type situation, the pilot may decide to fly a faster approach into an airport with medical services available. They would still touch down at the normal speed.