patrick.net

I was all for the bullet train at one point. Now with self driving cars on the horizon along with the "Boring Company" by Musk, do we really need it?
Even planes will be totally self piloted.
Drones that can take you anywhere are the real future. Think about it......We already have drone technology. We already have auto driving and flying technology. Just make bigger drones or smaller planes, and voila, all traffic problems gone. Fly to Silicon Valley for work, and fly back home to the farm. Voila, homes are now affordable.

Strategist says

I was all for the bullet train at one point. Now with self driving cars on the horizon along with the "Boring Company" by Musk, do we really need it?
Even planes will be totally self piloted.
Drones that can take you anywhere are the real future. Think about it......We already have drone technology. We already have auto driving and flying technology. Just make bigger drones or smaller planes, and voila, all traffic problems gone. Fly to Silicon Valley for work, and fly back home to the farm. Voila, homes are now affordable.

Trump's wall would be obsolete even before it's completed. We won't need illegal workers to pick strawberries anymore, as small drones with a basket can pick strawberries 24/7.

Fly to Silicon Valley for work, and fly back home to the farm. Voila, homes are now affordable.

"Tele-commuting" was the elixir that promised to do that for decades now.

Drones that can take you anywhere are the real future.

How much do you think that will cost? A Cessna is far more efficient and less expensive than a drone, and last time I rented one years ago, it costs over $100/hour.

HeadSet says

Fly to Silicon Valley for work, and fly back home to the farm. Voila, homes are now affordable.

"Tele-commuting" was the elixir that promised to do that for decades now.

Drones that can take you anywhere are the real future.

How much do you think that will cost? A Cessna is far more efficient and less expensive than a drone, and last time I rented one years ago, it costs over $100/hour.

Technology my friend. Technology over time always drops in price.
Drones will be electric with cheap power. Robots will make them 24/7, software that controls them will be dirt cheap.
You are right on the Cessna. I have been taking flying lessons on a Cessna, and it's close to $200 with the instructor.

How did that name slip through all the anti gun sjw committees in CA?

An electric drone requires very few moving parts, making it cheap to manufacture, cheap to maintain, and cheap to ensure safety.
Drones don't require runways, as they can take off from your driveway. You can plug it in for charging in your garage. They need very little infrastructure as compared to planes.

Technology my friend. Technology over time always drops in price.

Nice bromide, but not the case here. Any Drone that can carry a person will be a million dollar machine. That cost will have to be amortized over the life of the vehicle. Now consider insurance - ain't going to be cheap when you fly low over populated areas. Add to that the drone will need inspections after every flight, and a support system for scheduling, operation, and further maintenance.

Comparing life cycle costs of a simple aircraft like a Cessna to a drone is like comparing the costs of a bicycle to a Honda Gold Wing.

HeadSet says

Comparing life cycle costs of a simple aircraft like a Cessna to a drone is like comparing the costs of a bicycle to a Honda Gold Wing.

I was comparing the possibilities of a future drone to the latest iPhone. You are comparing it to the first telephone a hundred years ago.
Elon Musk, the God of Energy and Transportation can do it in a generation.

Strategist says

HeadSet says

Comparing life cycle costs of a simple aircraft like a Cessna to a drone is like comparing the costs of a bicycle to a Honda Gold Wing.

I was comparing the possibilities of a future drone to the latest iPhone. You are comparing it to the first telephone a hundred years ago.
Elon Musk, the God of Energy and Transportation can do it in a generation.

My point is that this is a financial problem, not a technical issue. No doubt that a 1 to 4 place people carrying drone can be invented, where we differ is that "tech" advances will make the drones affordable for common use. Human carrying drones will be million dollar machines with high liability and insurance costs. Only the rich will be taking such aerial taxis that will cost $500 to travel from one building top to another building top across town.

HeadSet says

My point is that this is a financial problem, not a technical issue. No doubt that a 1 to 4 place people carrying drone can be invented, where we differ is that "tech" advances will make the drones affordable for common use. Human carrying drones will be million dollar machines with high liability and insurance costs. Only the rich will be taking such aerial taxis that will cost $500 to travel from one building top to another building top across town.

It's only a financial problem when a new technology is introduced. Every single new technology is first purchased by early adapters who are wealthy, and as the volume increases and prices drop, it goes mainstream.
Electricity is an example. It was only available to the wealthy with mansions due to the prohibitive cost.
Cars are an example. Only the wealthy could buy an expensive and useless fad, a car, that required buying gasoline in a bottle from a pharmacy. People thought, the horse that provided cheap transportation for centuries could never be replaced.
Moral of the post:
You can never underestimate the power of technology to make obsolete what can never be made obsolete.
Stagecoach, horses, oil lamps, that were used for millennials, came to a sudden death.
Kodak, Sears, VCR, radios, met their death in decades or less.
What's next to die?

HEYYOU says

WillPowers says

Democrats are refusing to provide President Donald Trump for his border wall proposal.

It's called majority rule in the U.S. House.

And all this time I thought it was TDS. I am so ashamed.

What a waste. All that money could have been used for sex robot technology.

As fun as it is to call this a "train to nowhere", it would actually be considered an unconroversially sensible infrastructure project in just about any developed country.

The worst you could say about it factually is that the price tag and completion date are both about 3x over what is reasonable. There's probably no getting around this in the pressure cooker of letigiousness that is California. Lawsuits galore, union requirements, contractor pork (and probably kickbacks) run up the costs, but so does not cutting safety corners China-style.

I would go further and suggest that we should be building toward a national mesh of high capacity and high speed rail infrastructure that is owned by the people and leased to private operators at a profit sufficient to cover its maintenance and expansion.

This is a necessary facility to stay a competitive country for business, industry, and commerce in the 21st century. Imagine an America that never funded the Eisenhower Interstate Highway System Project or never funded DARPANet.

Strategist says

Elon Musk, the God of Energy and Transportation

Atheists gotta believe in something.

Issue isn’t money, Democrats want open borders because illegals are their future voters.

They will sacrifice America to multiculturalism.

cmdrdataleak says

I would go further and suggest that we should be building toward a national mesh of high capacity and high speed rail infrastructure

We already have it: it's called "aviation". Does the "high-speed, high-capacity" thing and doesn't even require rails.

Illegals can't fly though.

I've been against the "California high-speed rail" since inception. It's a complete porkfest boondoggle. It's slower than most other high speed rail that have been operating since the 80's like the TGV in France and Japan. It doesn't serve any major population centers, so the utility is suspect. But the $18B we are spending is the "best evar!!" Not.

I agree, let's let Mr. Musk get this problem done as well. He's halfway there already. Chicago and I believe Maryland have already committted to shortlines drilled by The Boring Company. It's too late to stop the insane California juggernaut, but other, less insane, states will do better.

Air is a costly way to deliver goods. The energy required to lift the plane to the stratosphere and overcome drag at 550 mph is simply much higher than efficient surface vehicles. Fast, though. Blimps might be better but they have other disadvantages. Slow rail is extremely efficient, but requires trucks for the last few miles. Trucks have become ascendant since laying down new track or pipelines is tough - all the existing pathways are taken, and no political will to put them in places where they're really needed. People fight against every new pipeline, even though the USA is criscrossed by thousands of miles of pipeworks. Progress never comes perfectly cleanly.

It's only a financial problem when a new technology is introduced.

Not that new, from 1948:


And this:
www.yXpIjefNbxk

I believe that Hiller's invention (including a hovercraft he built as a kid in 1943) would have taken off except for the Interstate System. Personal helicopters would be the best way for cross country travel over land with few roads. Remember, even General Aviation was big as late as the '70s, where virtually every county had a small airport loaded with Cessnas, Pipers, Beechcraft, Mooneys, etc. It was not uncommon fr a working man to own a Cessna 150. In fact, when I was in High School, I was able to get my Private Pilots License using money I got from working after school at Dairy Queen. If you had enough money for a Corvette, you could buy a new C-150. Used airplane were much cheaper. All this was ruined by a couple of ridiculous lawsuits, and now you need serious spare jack to buy or rent GA planes.

Is this the Greeny Greeny Choo Choo in a state that has serious water issues in the Central Valley, but the Coastie Elite are more interested in virtue signalling?

cmdrdataleak says

As fun as it is to call this a "train to nowhere", it would actually be considered an unconroversially sensible infrastructure project in just about any developed country.

The worst you could say about it factually is that the price tag and completion date are both about 3x over what is reasonable. There's probably no getting around this in the pressure cooker of letigiousness that is California. Lawsuits galore, union requirements, contractor pork (and probably kickbacks) run up the costs, but so does not cutting safety corners China-style.

I would go further and suggest that we should be building toward a national mesh of high capacity and high speed rail infrastructure that is owned by the people and leased to private operators at a profit sufficient to cover its maintenance and expansion.

This is a necessary facility to stay a competitive country for business, industry, and commerce in the 21st century. Imagine an America that never funded the Eisenhower Inter...

#1 it’s a train from Bakersfield to Fresno.
#2 planes already move peoplemore efficiently and cheaper. Southwest from one of the FIVE la metro airports to one of the three Bay Area metro airports is $100 round trip.
#3 we already have trains that move product across the whole country so business industry and commerce is a non issue.

I'm against this train for the same reasons as the wall.

It's a pet project, not the best solution to the "problem" it ostensibly solves. It's expensive AF and can't be re-purposed when ROI never materializes.

HEYYOU says

Some want the Constitution when it works for them & want to destroy it when it doesn't.

I Want the Democrats to stop being a bunch of obstructionists and come to the table with a sensible solution, not just no, no, no, to everything Trump and his constituents want. This has nothing to do with the constitution and everything to do with representing the people of this country that actually want decent border security and that includes a wall, unless you happen to be a brain washed dem.

Automan Empire says

I'm against this train for the same reasons as the wall.

It's a pet project, not the best solution to the "problem"

Oh, what is the best solution to the problem: fly drones overhead and watch the illegals pour in? Over 90% of illegal immigration is through places where there is no wall. Get a clue.

Rocketmanjoe says

Someone should tell Trump we don't live in a dictatorship.

Somebody should tell TDS sufferers Trump isn't a Dictator, he won the Electoral College, a state-by-state winner-takes-all popular election.

Rocketmanjoe says

Shit, if we are going to get drones anyway why not get them and see where a wall would be effective and where the natural terrain is enough of a deterrent.

Nah, future Dem governments will just cut or freeze the drone funding. This way something permanent is built.

You realize the wall isn't going to stretch from sea-to-sea anyway, yes?

Strategist says

I was all for the bullet train at one point. Now with self driving cars on the horizon along with the "Boring Company" by Musk, do we really need it?

Lol, how about combining self-driving cars with the "Boring Company"?

I like this idea!

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/not-boring-wednesday-december-17

The best way to describe “The Loop” is as a kind of subway system beneath Sin City. The contract was awarded in 2019, and most of the work was completed in eighteen months between contract award to opening. I defy you to find any example of a subway being built that fast.

The Loop has continued expanding and by this year, the Boring Company has installed a series of stations for resort and conference guests that is currently completing —wait for it— around 32,000 trips per day. There are currently six operating stops on the Strip and downtown, with more scheduled to open next year, including between the Strip and the airport, with 90 more stations already permitted.




The major innovation isn’t just the digging robots. Instead of subway cars, the Boring Company just uses Teslas. So it doesn’t need to build out a giant infrastructure of rails, trains, controllers, safety systems, fire suppression, and so forth. It’s just an underground roadway that runs in a circle. Passengers wait to board the next car that comes around. They each get their own private cars, which is nice and quiet but admittedly reduces opportunities for interacting with the local wildlife or getting stabbed in the neck.

One reason the US is so car-centric is the real need to put metal and glass between oneself and the "vibrant diversity" of big cities.

Until one of those EVs erupts into a fireball in the tunnel and the occupants can’t get out, fire consumes the oxygen in the loop, and suffocates the remaining passengers of other stuck vehicles…..

That thought occurred to me too.

ForcedTQ says

Until one of those EVs erupts into a fireball in the tunnel and the occupants can’t get out, fire consumes the oxygen in the loop, and suffocates the remaining passengers of other stuck vehicles…..

Still safer than the subway or BART.