It’ll never get funded, never pass the regulatory process, be tied up in court by the Sierra Club for years ...
And, since the only way it could get built for great distances would be above ground [underground not economically feasible], every whackjob would be taking pock shots at it with their guns.
One leak to break the vacuum - and it comes to a stop ...
Aside from the cost, I can’t see how they could compensate for earth movements. The last thing I’d want is to slam into a side at 800 mph because the tunnel moved over by three inches.
I have often had thoughts along the lines of this system.
However, rather than carrying passengers, I thought of tubes, perhaps smaller in diameter, that would be designed for freight only.
Rather than taking the people off the roads, why not take the trucks off the roads? Likewise remove cargo from air traffic.
With freight, you can have faster acceleration and sharper curves, and temperature/pressure is less of an issue. Plus, if there’s an accident, nobody dies. It would also be a good proof of concept before using it for passengers. And you could offer faster package delivery between major cities.
Anyone with claustrophobia would freak out in that thing.
I guess we are now starting with super-gay names for cutting-edge (what passes for it) bankruptcy ideas.
Won’t save anyone time. TSA will be in charge of security. two-three hour waits on both ends will really negate any time savings.
>> similar to Linux
It’s not reasonable to compare the demands of civil engineering to the indeterminate, malleable process of software development.