[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/n/ - Transportation

[Advertise on 4chan]

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 72 posters in this thread.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks. Make sure to check your spam box!

Self-serve ads are available again! Check out our new advertising page here.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: F8aj-gVpdU6aBiFe.gif (2.5 MB, 256x144)
2.5 MB
2.5 MB GIF
https://twitter.com/mickakers/status/1380312122282844160
Are you thrilled by our "future of transportation"?
>>
>it's just a fucking tunnel
#wow #whoa
>>
Ah. It's going to be a playground ride for grownups, then, like the LV Monorail. Not 'the future of mass transit as we know it'. So brave.
>>
>>1636072
It's a cute concept, and certainly zero emission vehicles are an ideal matchup for cheaper to build and operate more compact tunnels. But it still really needs to be multi lane and capable of at least short term accommodation of gas vehicles because emergency vehicles aren't EVs yet.
>>
File: 0_image1jpeg.jpg (100 KB, 1200x630)
100 KB
100 KB JPG
>>1636868
till the lithium cells in 1 car catch fire and kill everyone in the tunnel
>>
>Elon discovered boring equipment
>>
>>1636873
Didn't consider that, do they have a contingency plan for such a thing? Lithium fumes would ruin everyone in the tunnel's day.
>>
>>1636875
when you bring up the risk of dying an awful, painful death being roasted alive trapped in a pringles can, choking on fumes in an inescapable underground tunnel, musk reply guys tend to kick up sand about how regular road cars have accidents too, so really this isn't anything to worry about

on a less glib note, i'm earnestly surprised that safety guys aren't swarming all over this. the cynic in me is thinking regular transit companies aren't kicking up a 'how come musk gets to roast people to death' fuss, because they're pondering how they can get in on ignoring pa$$enger $afety i$$ue$ for $ome rea$on as well.
>>
>>1636885
Musk probably has an earthquake machine to sink the whole tunnel to cover up a battery fire.
>What a tragedy caused by mother Earth, all those poor tesla owners haha we will rebuild
>>
Car infrastructure will never be profitable.
>>
File: Eyj2f59UcAEWUcn.jpg (228 KB, 662x1024)
228 KB
228 KB JPG
>>1636072
here's your privately owned muskcar only subway bro
>>
>>1636885
>musk reply guys tend to kick up sand about how regular road cars have accidents too, so really this isn't anything to worry about

You sound like a flat earther: Here comes the Globetards with their “what about satellites” and “I’ve been to Australia and the moon is upside down there”!

Planes *do* fall out of the sky. Regular cars *do* catch fire and mow down children. Trains *do* derail. You can’t just occupatio a valid argument and presto, it’s now invalid, dipshit.
>>
>>1636973
anon, lose the glib flat-earther nonsense and just say what you think. i'm happy to listen if you'll be normal about this.
>>
if it helps, for clarity: my point is that yes, car accidents happen, but the fact people get run over doesn't 'cancel out' someone dying a horrible death in a lithium fire underground, and it certainly doesn't make it ok to design a car tunnel that seems to make people dying a firey, choking death an inevitability to begin with.
>>
>>1636977
I said what I think: You can’t just occupatio a valid argument and presto, it’s now invalid, dipshit.
>>
>>1636987
Ferrying people around in thin-walled aluminum tubes near the speed of sound at 30,000ft kind of invites the occasional accident too. We accept the risk because the risk is acceptable. For the Loop concept, the risk is currently unknown.
>>
>>1636989
>For the Loop concept, the risk is currently unknown.
but mass transit, in tunnels underground, has been a thing for about a century and a half now. so i'd say actually, we know a pretty fair amount about the risks and difficulties involved. the loop seems to have ignored all this, which is why i am both scornful of the system, and of the person in charge of the system, who seems to be wilfully ignoring these risks and difficulties. and has instead produced a system where the inevitable outcome of an emergency situation is its passengers being cooked alive.
>>
>>1636991
Everybody knows there will be horrific accidents in one of these tunnels if the concept takes off, just like everybody knew that passenger planes would fall out of the sky, trains would derail, boats would sink and cars would crash before those modes of transportation were rolled out on a large scale. Everybody knows this, everybody knew. Everybody. When you keep pointing to something that everybody can see, and are already taking into account, you look like an idiot.
>>
>>1636995
>before those modes of transportation were rolled out on a large scale
The thing is that comparable modes of transportation have been rolling for more than a decade now, so they could use the security insights gained there in their "new" mode of transport.
>>
>>1636995
i'll point out again that mass transit in underground tunnels has existed since the london underground opened in january 1863. so, we've had 158 years to learn the risks of underground mass transit, and how to mitigate those risks.

the loop doesn't appear to have been designed with these known risk mitigations in mind (escape + evacuation routes, fail-safe systems, ventilation of smoke...). thus, my scorn for the system, and the person responsible.
>>
>>1636998
They did. They just didn’t include you in the conversation, because you’re just a dipshit with no valuable input on the topic. You’re free to not use the service if it fully opens to the public. Lots of people are scared of flying too (though most of them have the decency not to assume that no one else considered the risks).
>>
>>1636998
Sounds exactly how they handle spacex. They've had several rockets explode by being dumb and ignoring experts, leading to them making mistakes that haven't been made since the 50s.

Or cutting corners and trying to use parts from groups that are blacklisted by other rocket companies, for good reason.

I guess Elons companies like learning lessons the hard way.
>>
File: cat in car.jpg (125 KB, 720x960)
125 KB
125 KB JPG
>>1636875
>do they have a contingency plan for such a thing?
There isn't even to space to open the fucking door. Even with a simple flat tire you're stuck in the tunnel
>>
>>1637004
>They did. They just didn’t include you in the conversation
well, if you have any well-sourced information or resources about the loop's safety, please share; i'd certainly be interested.

>You’re free to not use the service if it fully opens to the public
this is true. likewise, i'm free to be concerned about people who *do* use the service, because ultimately i don't want them to come to harm.
>>
>>1637006
Flats almost never happen on regular roads, which is covered in litter. Flats in a clean tunnel will happen at 1% the rate above ground. On the extremely rare occasion a flat tire finds its way into a tunnel, the car will simply drive slowly to the end of the tunnel. Big whoop.

And there is ample space to open the doors. As a general rule, if you have to lie to make a point, you’re probably wrong.
>>
>>1637007
>...well-sourced information or resources about the loop's safety, please share; i'd certainly be interested.

I have all the information. Here it is: accidents will happen, people will die.

That’s it.

>i'm free to be concerned about people who *do* use the service, because ultimately i don't want them to come to harm.

I can lay those concerns to rest; people will come to harm, just like the roughly one million people who die in transportation related accidents annually already.
>>
>>1637019
given your confidence, i was earnestly hoping you'd have some kind of press releases, presentations, safety documents etc. to share.

>I have all the information. Here it is: accidents will happen, people will die.
>That’s it.
well, i'd prefer to think the loop are *not* completely powerless to do anything about the risk of people coming to harm while using their service, especially given the wealth of information and knowledge and resources that are undoubtedly available to them (the loop, that is).
>>
>>1636874
Imagine what he'll do when he discovers exciting equipment.
>>
>>1637030
boooooo
>>
the actual motivation behind this is making cities allow """self driving""" cars by making they think they will lose income or look incompetent.

Its evil vs. evil.
>>
>>1636072
I generally like Musk's ideas and he's usually smart enough to only invest in the ideas that are remotely feasible. But I genuinely don't understand what he wants to accomplish with this. Tunnels in every city so all car traffic can be put underground? Not every city is built on suitable soil. And I understand this is a technology demonstrator, but wouldn't it be 100% more effective if he put track down in the tunnel and ran a few trains with a capacity of hundreds of people each?
>>
>>1637041
We have airplanes on every city, yet we still have cars. We have trains across the US, yet still have cars. We have bikes in every city, yet we still have cars. We have people walking in every city, yet still have cars.
>>
File: Dz8U4ScVAAAW7Am.jpg (59 KB, 878x591)
59 KB
59 KB JPG
>>1637005
Yeah, those morons, when will they learn?
>>
File: Safe enough.jpg (70 KB, 1200x630)
70 KB
70 KB JPG
>>1637025
>well, i'd prefer to think the loop are *not* completely powerless to do anything about the risk of people coming to harm while using their service,

Hope in one hand, shit in the other etc. The Loop is as powerless as all other industries to eliminate risk of fatalities completely, which is why no industry is seriously trying to achieve that goal. Nor should they. All industries have plans for eventualities so as to *mitigate* fatalities and injuries, and so will the loop, but no industry even pretends to have plans for every scenario. For the airline industry, when a plane is stalled a hundred meters above the ground, the contingency plan is "fuck it". And that's fine.

As it stands, a mile driven down a naked loop, without any safety features, is arguably safer than driving a mile above ground. Virtually all major accidents happens as a result of collisions with animals, potholes, debris or other cars, wet roads, heavy rain and/or strong winds, glare from sunlight etc. etc., all elements eliminated from the loop. What almost never happens is a car wrecking due to a random, sudden mechanical failure while driving down a straight, smooth road under optimal light and temperature conditions.

>But what if a car randomly explodes down there!

Bummer! It probably would have exploded up there too. As for the other cars in the loop; the ones downstream of the loop will proceed to their destinations. The cars upstream are one software update away from automatically stopping when a vehicle in front is detected to be in distress, and can autopilot in reverse away from the scene at 60mph (Teslas are mechanically capable of reversing in 150mph). This will happen so seldomly that most people won't give it a second thought. The rest will simply walk instead, which will probably be way more statistically dangerous, but feel much safer, and thus be preferred by dullards. Enjoy your walk.
>>
>>1637133
You're talking big for somebody who didn't do any risk matrix calculations.
>>
>>1637118
For last year, they launched 2x the combined world's (- spaceX) payload. For this year, they're aiming for 3-4x the world's payload capacity.
>>
https://youtu.be/91-qwftOYVc
>Chauffeur, drive me to the convention center
the absolute state of US public transport
>>
>>1636072
Why is Vegas so fucking retarded? Just buy some fucking buses, get a train, something.
>>
>>1636988
"but ICE cars have accidents also!" isnt a comparable argument to "yo this tunnel is really unsafe because it just takes one car to have a catastrophic failure and now everybody is done for". It's like making an argument against going 200mph in a school zone and you say "well planes go much faster then that lol"
>>
File: 1612590984794.png (407 KB, 568x564)
407 KB
407 KB PNG
>>1637004
> They did. They just didn’t include you in the conversation
oh shit, they included you in the board meetings? post ur documen--
>>1637019
>I have all the information. Here it is: accidents will happen, people will die.
awesome. so you have nothing.
>>
File: 1601739582651.jpg (29 KB, 483x483)
29 KB
29 KB JPG
>>1637133
>Bummer!
please go back to twitter please go back to twitter please go back to twitter please go back to twitter please go back to twitter please go back to twitter please go back to twitter please go back to twitter please go back to twitter please go back to twitter please go back to twitter please go back to twitter please go back to twitter
>>
>>1636885
it's interesting that Las Vegas told Boring Company they have to lower a station throughput due to fire safety regulations yet they haven't said anything on the tunnel itself
>>
>>1637041
He sell autonomous cars, not trains, and that's why he build autonomous car tunnels
Being an American he also probably cannot understand why trains are needed
>>
>>1637133
>a mile driven down a naked loop, without any safety features, is arguably safer than driving a mile above ground. Virtually all major accidents happens as a result of collisions with animals, potholes, debris or other cars, wet roads, heavy rain and/or strong winds, glare from sunlight etc. etc., all elements eliminated from the loop.
that's fair. however, it's also fair to point out that the loop introduces *entirely different* risks instead, by virtue of operating battery vehicles in a confined space. this isn't whataboutism, it's simply a fact that underground mass transit has its own inherent risks and dangers that are different, but equally valid.

to be glib, if your car catches fire on the way to work, you can manually pilot the thing to the side of the road, escape the vehicle, and stand a safe distance back away from traffic and from the burning vehicle, and wait for help to arrive. if your car catches fire inside the loop, there doesn't seem to be a way to escape the lithium fire. the tunnel is going to fill with thick, acrid smoke, that will choke you and disorient you. there are no safe refuges designed into the tunnel to escape to (that i am aware of).

that's not to say that your vehicle will randomly burst into flames, of course, just illustrating the different hazards posed by confined tunnels, that you appear to be overlooking.
>>
>>1637133
>The Loop is as powerless as all other industries to eliminate risk of fatalities completely, which is why no industry is seriously trying to achieve that goal
this, on the face of it, is also correct. nobody is trying to eliminate all risk whatsoever, because that's impossible. however, on the flipside, as a society we've agreed on standards and best practices and whatnot where, ultimately, the aim is to reduce risk as far as is reasonably practicable, because mass transit companies (and other companies, of course, but staying on topic) have a duty of care to keep their passengers safe. bringing me to my next point:

>All industries have plans for eventualities so as to *mitigate* fatalities and injuries, and so will the loop, but no industry even pretends to have plans for every scenario.
this, again, is true on the face of it. however, expanding on this from my own direct personal experience producing risk assessments on oil refineries, the aim is not to eliminate risk altogether, but to reduce the factors that cause the risk, to reduce the overall risk to an acceptable level. this is called the swiss cheese model of safety.

>For the airline industry, when a plane is stalled a hundred meters above the ground, the contingency plan is "fuck it".
i don't know much about air travel, or air machines, but this sounds absurd. do you have anything to share that expands on this scenario?
>>
>>1637133
>>1637466
https://www.reviewjournal.com/business/tourism/get-a-close-look-at-shuttle-system-40-feet-beneath-the-convention-center-2325137/amp/
you guys can stop arguing
> Cars have enough clearance in the tunnels that riders can open doors and get out in an emergency.
>>
>>1636072
kinda slow
>random rainbow flashing lights
well shit I'm convinced now
how can one even begin to question such perfection
>>1636875
nope
>>
>>1636072
He is some sort of juicy troll:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYCHx_Jc0Ec

(hydrogen and metal air might be able to power this using electricity)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9XIzG-NShU
>>
>>1637011
You expect people to take care of the maintenance, I've seen people driving with tires with the reinforcement exposed.
>>
>>1637589
When your concept of transportation requires more than 1/3 of the space for propulsion and it's not human powered, there's something very wrong with it
>>
>>1637151
Since you did, show it.
>>
>>1637351
"Yo this tunnel is really unsafe because it just takes one car to have a catastrophic failure and now everybody is done for" is not an argument. It's an easily refutable, asinine claim.
>>
>>1637466
>...that you appear to be overlooking.

I don't even remotely appear to overlook these hazards. I've explicitly acknowledged several times that people will die in these tunnels if they become a thing. I'm pointing out that critics are overlooking the fact that *all* modes of transportation have their inherent risks associated with them, and that comparing the Loop to a hypothetical, ideal situation with 0 deaths per 1 trillion passenger miles is delusion.

This is not to say that there is nothing to criticise about the Loop. Just keep it to criticism that makes sense.
>>
>>1637819
>comparing the Loop to a hypothetical, ideal situation with 0 deaths per 1 trillion passenger miles is delusion.
i don't think anybody has done that? in this thread, at least.
>>
>>1637474
>i don't know much about air travel, or air machines, but this sounds absurd. do you have anything to share that expands on this scenario?

It's not absurd at all. It's self evident. Pilots, and the entire airline industry as a whole, operate with carefully designed checklists with specific operations to be executed in specified orders, which is pulled out and followed to the letter when the situation calls for them. Gears won't retract after takeoff? Gears-won't-retract-checklist is pullet up and followed to the letter. Engine flames out? Co-pilot pulls up the checklist for engine flameout. Stabiliser breaks clean off 4 minutes after take-off? There is no checklist. There is only death.

Of course, in response to that actually happening (flight 587), directives were put in place to reduce the frequency of stabilisers falling off, but there are still no backup plans for the event that a stabiliser falls off in the future. If they were to write such a checklist, it would probably say "Pull out your phone and try to call your loved ones and say goodbye". And that is *exactly* how it should be.
>>
>>1637784
And still flats are extremely rare, even on the surface. They will be much, much rarer in the Loop.
>>
>>1637822
>It's not absurd at all. It's self evident
well, i disagree. the rest of your post doesn't seem to address anything i posted, either. you're telling me that air transport companies have checklists for every scenario imaginable, but also in one specific, known example, they'll ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ and just ... sweep up the wreckage afterwards? what?

so, to be completely clear, i'm politely asking again if you have something well-sourced to verify something you said, which was that
>[...] when a plane is stalled a hundred meters above the ground, the contingency plan is "fuck it".
this is because such absurd, callous disregard for life and safety, for passengers that the company has a duty of care for, is unthinkable; and i'd think that any company that *did* wilfully abandon their responsibility like that would be made an example of by regulators and sued into the ground.
>>
>>1637785
Learn to research and develop, hebrew.
>>
>>1637041
Good public transport means less demand for cars. Of course Musk knows this.
>>
>>1637838
>researching dead ends
That's how you go bankrupt
>>
this time its gonna work, right?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUXEFj0t7Ek
>>
File: chart3.png (20 KB, 568x327)
20 KB
20 KB PNG
>>1637373
>*indecipherable euro noises*
>>
>>1638336
this looks like a population graph to me...?
>>
wait, no, that's wrong.
>>
>>1638340
population and wealth
>>
>>1638336
Thanks for verification
>>
Never understood why liberal faggots hate this so much. Has anyone even seen a video of this in action?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUoZCUqbCNg

>stations can have different sizes based on passenger volume so one station can have a few car bays while another has many
>vehicles are continuously moving since vehicles ahead pull off to the side at their passengers destination
>cheaper to build than a typical metro
>they are developing a 12 seat vehicle for the tunnel
>networks can be a mix of below and underground segments

>>1637466
they are working on a 12 seat vehicle for the tunnel, they could build fire suppression into the vehicle as well as fire suppression in the tunnel as a fail safe and add exhausts. the way the system is designed means shorter distances between stations so they may not need to install as many exits.

>>1636868
even normal metros cant accommodate
>>
>>1636998
they could have frequent cross passage escapes into the tunnel going in the other direction. if the escapes door sensor goes off it could signal all the cars to either stop or slow down.
>>
File: file.png (520 KB, 792x527)
520 KB
520 KB PNG
>>1637006
>no room to open door
ok retard
>>
File: falcon door.gif (2.01 MB, 500x281)
2.01 MB
2.01 MB GIF
>>1637006
>no room to open doors
ok retard
>>
>>1636072
Lol anything that's underground in L.A. becomes a haven for the homeless.
>>
>>1640753
Essentially a single-lane underground highway for proprietary Tesla vehicle, nothing new
>>
>>1640803
And the metro is a single lane underground railway for proprietary rail cars. Main difference is Elons approach costs 4 times less to build and offers certain types of flexibility which a train could never offer like more frequent stops, variable station size, and vehicles in the loop are in constant motion when they are not loading passengers. Also a network like this does not have to operate entirely underground and you can further save costs by implementing some above ground sectors when space allows for it.
>>
>>1640849
>proprietary rail cars
Nigga, they have standards.
>>
>>1640851
And when only one or two companies make something for a certain standard they are effectively proprietary. Elons project is a road in a tunnel, whose to say the city cant just kick his ass out down the road and use another companies product? Obviously when the solution is the first of its kind its going to be proprietary until the tech is license or stolen by other parties.
>>
>>1640853
No it's not.
The standard is out there, if someone wants to make a system that works with that standard, there's nothing stopping them.
>>
>>1640803
Helps sell Tesla.
If you don't like it build your own boring company.
>>
>>1640855
when it comes time to bid on something who are you going to trust? the company that developed the standard and has been working with it for a long time or the up and coming organization that can build something for the standard but hasnt done so already?

TLDR this thread if full of retards who dislike Elon so much that they cant even do any proper research and literally believe these are tunnels meant just for wealthy Tesla owners.
>>
>>1638087
Learn to find out dead ends, hebrew.
>>
>>1640860
>when it comes time to bid on something who are you going to trust?
The company that presents the best project.
I don't give a fuck if I buy an M4 bolt from Greg the guy with a lathe or MetalSpiral Co.
A standard is a standard, and anyone who follows it will make a compatible machine.
>>
>>1640903
Ok then what is the big deal if its proprietary or not? A lot of public agencies use proprietary stuff and a lot of new stuff is proprietary until competitors make an open standard copy or the proprietor just gives out the spec. Why is this person so negative on it? >>1640803

Besides the technique used to build the tunnels and whatever equipment is there to monitor and control the fleet of cars I cant thing of anything stopping a city from switching the actual vehicles for another manufacturer.
>>
>>1640849
tbf you've just invented buses though. electric buses, and ones that travel exclusively underground in a single circuit in a single us city, but nevertheless, that's a bus.
>>
>>1640766
>>1640768
i don't know much about teslas, or even much about tunnels really, but using ordinary open-outward car doors in a tunnel seems like bad design to me. this is because when you open an ordinary car door, even assuming the tunnel is wide enough to accommodate them at full, uh, open-ness, the act of opening the door blocks an escape route until the door is closed again. which, ok, you can say 'well durr close the door again', but that's asking a lot of people who will be acting in OH SHIT mode.

ditto gullwing doors. as, although they don't block escape routes, you instead have to work against the weight of the door in order to escape. which, again, is asking a lot of people who will be in SHIT FUCK mode.

and it's like, if we made the car a little larger instead ... with sliding doors, and large windows that could be used as a safe exit...
>>
File: file.png (74 KB, 829x221)
74 KB
74 KB PNG
>>1640953
yes it is a bus small enough for the tunnel but these ones are going to be autonomous which means you can have many smaller busses in place of a regular one since you dont need to triple the staff. this would result in a more steady flow of passengers since they are not all crowding waiting for one large bus.

>>1640955
>and it's like, if we made the car a little larger instead ... with sliding doors, and large windows that could be used as a safe exit...
this is exactly what they are doing, for the time being they are using their existing production cars with a driver to mind the cars autopilot and the passengers while they are in the concept proving phase.
>>
>>1640955
The only people who would need to leave on foot are the passengers of the car with the problem. Cars in front will proceed to the end, the cars behind will reverse, probably automatically. A scenario where two cars will have problems, and box in other cars, is so statistically unlikely over the stretches planned for this system that it rounds down to zero.

https://youtu.be/SiB8GVMNJkE
>>
File: Ezb3Jp6XsA07-pJ.jpg (153 KB, 1024x823)
153 KB
153 KB JPG
>>1641285
Have they actually done any testing for an emergency scenario yet? Because right now with manually driven vehicles, if a battery catches fire and the tunnel starts to fill with smoke, I could definitely see difficulties with trying to reverse a car at any reasonable speed when you can't see a thing. Ditto with "automatic" driving - at the moment Tesla autopilot only has limited reversing ability and is only at SAE level 2, meaning that a driver still needs to be ready to take control at any moment.

Additionally, what model of cars are they currently using? Because in the event of a battery failure, without emergency walkways to access the accident scene, the process of stopping and reversing cars would delay access of first responders, all while passengers struggle to escape, or possibly can't escape at all, from a burning vehicle.
>>
>>1636917
It'd probably move more people if it was reserved for bicycles (and e-bikes)
>>
File: file.png (1.94 MB, 1200x968)
1.94 MB
1.94 MB PNG
>>1641308
>manually driven vehicles
the vehicles are on autopilot, the "driver" is effectively supervising the car and keeping an eye on the occupants. they are working on a 12 seat van as mentioned here >>1641025 and its going to have sliding doors and more barrier free features like wheel chair ramps and seats which can sold up for wheelchairs and windows with escape levers.
also you gotta remember without tracks you can get a little more creative with your emergency response vehicles.
>>
>>1636917
you are a fucking doofus if you still think that loop is going to let ordinary people use their own personal vehicles to travel within the loop. its going to employ autonomous vehicles.
>>
>>1641385
>you are a fucking doofus if you still think that loop is going to let ordinary people use their own personal vehicles to travel within the loop. its going to employ autonomous vehicles.
Thing is Tesla can release Tesla versions certified to ride these tunnel (in autonomous mode using Tesla traffic management software). Its would be great selling point of Teslas. You got traffic jams. Tesla users got tunnels.
Tesla. Tesla. Tesla.
>>
>>1641410
Well obviously its only going to be Tesla right now but this is a concept that any government could easily copy. Not Teslas fault that their competitors didnt make an attractive bid for the LVCC.
>>
>>1641308
>Have they actually done any testing for an emergency scenario yet?
They're probably working on it. It's a system in beta.

A Tesla catch fire at a rate of about 10% the US average for all vehicles. All factors considered, a Tesla in a (current) Loop is probably the safest place for an occupant of a motor vehicle to be. When Autopilot has been updated to a finished Loop Mode, the passenger miles per fatality will be in the tens of billions. Anyone who are worried about the safety of the loop, but not worried about Maoris in clown outfits breaking into their bedroom at night and pummelling them to death with a baby manatee, just don't know how statistics work.
>>
>>1641447
This! Car fires can and have happened in all makes of vehicles. Tesla is also working on a high capacity vehicle which will come with fire suppression built in along with sliding doors and escape hatches. Municipalities who want to implement Teslas system can easily demand additional safety features. Too many pinko faggots here who dont understand how contracts work or that these sorts of projects are tailored to what the client explicitly asks for.
>>
>>1641452
>This! Car fires can and have happened in all makes of vehicles.
None of them reignite on their own though
Lithium fires do
>>
i feel that bickering about catch-on-fire rates and whether they're good numbers or bad numbers is something, but it's aside of the central issue: the loop system as it exists currently is a series of EV taxis being piloted manually through a tunnel underground, with apparently minimal consideration for 'safety by design'. and relying on calling it a system in beta or whatever, as though they can somehow code themselves into safety instead, is irresponsible.
>>
>>1642280
Catch on fire rates is highly relevant in this discussion, as it is just about the only way something could go terribly wrong in a Loop system, and as such it is a system ‘safe by design’ if that rate is very low. What’s more, the Loop *is* a system in beta, and is treated as such. There is nothing irresponsible going on with the Loop right now.

>>1641895
This is just false. A car with a tank full of petrol can absolutely reignite. As for lithium fires, the prescribed treatment is plenty of water. A regular sprinkler system would go a long way, but even better would be something triggered by thermal cameras.
>>
>>1642744
>Catch on fire rates is highly relevant in this discussion, as it is just about the only way something could go terribly wrong in a Loop system
no, that's incorrect. you are overlooking that the tunnel itself is unsafe by design. for example, vehicles that use the loop, as they exist currently, use standard open-outwards doors. which block forward escape routes until the doors are closed again, see my incredibly shitty diagram.

and to treat this like a post-MVP bug report to be squashed, given the consequences of this 'bug' being left unfixed, is frankly ghoulish. like, 'i'm sorry all those people were hurt and died horribly, but loopmobile 2.0 with all-new sliding-door technology (eta tbc) will totally prevent this completely unforeseeable series of events from reoccuring as we progress towards final release'
>>
>>1642778
You are making up a scenario which will not happen. What situation would call for people to abandon their vehicles and pass several other abandoned cars on foot? If there is a problem with one car, all cars in front of it will proceed to the end of the tunnel. Cars behind will reverse.

And why are you accusing Loop of ‘leaving this bug unfixed’? It’s a system in beta, currently running at a few percent of theoretical capacity for that exact reason. Which is the perfectly responsible thing to do.
>>
>>1641385
>its going to employ autonomous vehicles.
designed and built by tesla?
>>
>>1642862
to start yes, but it is just tunnels in the ground with flat roads in them, other companies can make vehicles for this.
>>
>>1642806
>Cars behind will reverse.
You haven't touched a steering wheel in your life, have you?
>>
>>1636101
Not just any tunnel anon, one that you need a $50,000 car to use!

What's that? We could just hire the Japs to build a shinkansen here because we're the wealthiest nation on planet earth? Fuck that...high speed rail is for faggots! I want a teleportation machine that also sucks my dick and some asshole billionaire in CA totally promised to make me one.
>>
>>1642874
>it is just tunnels in the ground with flat roads in them
hmmm, so what you're saying is that we've already had this technology for over a century?
>>
File: 1618153434051.gif (560 KB, 320x200)
560 KB
560 KB GIF
>>1636072
This is just a train with extra steps. Why did I end up in such a wrong timeline?
>>
>>1637589
I forgot to mention maybe overhead power lines can be adapted to work with this and maybe it can glide over existing tracks.
>>
>>1642878
>cars cant reverse
>>
>>1642974
it's more like, people can barely pilot their cars forward under ideal conditions. asking people to drive their their vehicles in reverse to reach safety, under an emergency condition which requires evacuation of another vehicle(s) in the tunnel, is going to be a challenge. to put it lightly.

like maybe there is a 'in case of emergency' system in place. it'd be interesting if they'd mentioned this instead of LAS VEGAS = LIGHTSHOW
>>
>>1642878
You haven sat in a Tesla in your life, have you?
>>
>>1642885
Really? You’re going to pretend that you’re too stupid to see the differences between this system and conventional road tunnels in order to win a rhetorical point? Because that’s not how you win an argument. That’s how you convince people you are so stupid that you are not worth talking to so they leave the conversation, which you might be stupid enough to chalk up as a win. And you’re just winning arguments all around, so you think it’s an effective strategy.
>>
>>1642985
In the eventual fully developed loop, humans will not be piloting the cars.
>>
>>1642989
perhaps so. still, this changes nothing at present, as it relies on some unknown future update to solve the current problem. basically, 'don't get into a situation requiring evacuation in the first place, please submit a bug report on your way out'.

like i'd fucking love to be able to use that excuse in my line of work lol. yeah it's fucked now, but we'll un-fuck it in future. when and how? *shrug*
>>
>>1642992
Well, that’s how product development works, so you could always get into that if you want. I’m involved with the development of a new product which is currently pushed out the door to beta testers, and we are tweaking the design and production in response to their feedback. It’s just part of the process.
>>
>>1642885
yeah but it hasn't been cheap or to build for most of the century and only recently have we even acquired the tech to make it feasible for public transit (electric vehicles which can drive autonomously).

not even sure why liberal cucks keep trying to shoot this project down before its even had its day in court. its not like this affects anyone outside of vegas.
>>
>>1643123
>its not like this affects anyone outside of vegas
my view is that it detracts from actual public transit efforts
"why build rail today when you might have level 5 autonomous vehicles next year (by which we really mean in a decade or so)?"
it's like people who visit nyc and are like "wow you can take the subway everywhere so cool" but never touch the system during rush hour so they dont see just how much improvement is needed and never take the bus so they dont understand just how much mta busses suck, especially outside manhattan. L-train replacement route in brooklyn? hah, ok, looks like im going to get to wait 30 minutes for the next packed one
i'd be a lot more ok with this "gulf state vanity"-esque stuff if musk was honest about the capabilities and limitations and talked about how they expect to improve the system in the future, rather than promise the moon and leave you stranded in the middle of outer space to die of asphyxiation
>>
>>1643190
Just drive car.
>>
>>1641308
>if a battery catches fire and the tunnel starts to fill with smoke
This is a big thing
https://www.forconstructionpros.com/latest-news/article/21283671/teslapowered-autonomous-people-mover-constructed-in-las-vegas
>The tunnel does not require the exhaust system that is typically used in a transportation tunnel because the vehicles are electric powered
So the ventilation is much less than a regular car tunnel. On the surface, this seems reasonable - piston effect is enough for subways (which could catch fire), why not for EVs?
But subway trains don't have giant li-ion batteries. To stop an electrical fire, you just cut power to the tracks and turn on the sprinklers
The ventilation system here may be inadequate to enable any level of visibility in case of fire. Ideally the driver would notice the fire and hit a button to immediately deploy the sprinklers and evacuate before it reaches that point, but panicking people tend to do dumb things
>>
>>1642988
it is literally a conventional road tunnel, well its actually worse since there is only enough room for one direction of traffic
don't see a service tunnel either for ventilation/evacuation
looks like a well lit death trap
feel free to actually correct me instead of suck off your techbro daddy
>>
>>1643190
vegas is the perfect place to test this out. these hotels are actually paying to have a station at their properties. they also have transit issues and tourists who are willing to pay to use this.

>>1643212
what makes you think cities are forbidden from just demanding fire suppression, fume extraction, and more exits? easy enough to have vehicles with on board suppression and tunnels with in line suppression. you are looking at a concept and assuming that this is what its going to look like everywhere its implemented.
>>
>>1643222
you dumb nigger its 2 tunnels and you keep whining about shit that can easily be added in future projects.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUoZCUqbCNg
>>
>>1643227
>2 tunnels
so... a tunnel for each direction of travel. cool. we are now reaching levels of infrastructure achieved 200 years ago. again there is no service tunnel. this is not some bonus feature that gets added onto the first day patch
its a basic safety that is required for the tunnel system to operate at all
you've still yet to explain how this is in any way shape or form superior to the existing, non proprietary *safe* tunnels that we currently have and have had for centuries
>>
>>1643229
entire thing was built for 53 million and its still in a development phase. those safety features you keep talking about like a retard can easily be implemented in future projects because these types of projects are tailored to the clients requirements.

the 200 year old tunnels are being used for privative trains riding on expensive tracks with specialized equipment which require large infrequent stations because you cant have too many since these things have to stop at every station in line. the boring co tunnel system allows vehicles to pull over so that the ones behind it can keep moving if the station is not requested by a passenger.
>>
>>1643235
Why are you lying?
>>
>>1643227
Kill yourself nigger. Musk made very specific claims about what the LV convention loop would be and none of those things actually happened.
>>
>>1643235
just... holy brain worms batman. The absolute STATE of muskoids.
what kind of parasocial mental gymnastics is going on in there that you feel he's your mate or something and you need to defend his little pet project?
>>
>>1643229
>again there is no service tunnel.
Subways don't have service tunnels.
>>
>>1643240
whats wrong with the project faggot? all you are saying is "huuuurrrr i cant believe you like that!!!"
>>1643237
what claims? the fuck are you talking about?
>>1643236
where am i lying? you could try to do a little better than making baseless claims.
>>
>>1643240
>>1643237
>>1643236
Why are you lying?
>>
>>1643240
What could possibly motivate such retched hate against one man that you are rendered completely unable to recognise his achievements? I see this all the time, people huffing and guffawing about Musk not being able to lower the cost of spaceflight by quite as much as he said he could. Dude, how about noticing that he *did* significantly reduce the cost of spaceflight, something none of youse did?

I'm observing the Musk phenomenon from some distance, I don't like the guy, I wouldn't have him over for dinner, but when I look at the two factions of people who are obsessed with him, namely those who loves him and those who hates him, to me it's the haters who seems more cultish. Like they decided early on that he's a fraud, which five-ten years ago he absolutely did look like, and now they can't accept the fact that he's actually delivering on a scale hardly seen before, between SpaceX, Tesla, Starlink etc. You guys need to just take a deep breath, look yourselves in the mirror and say to yourself "Maybe I was wrong about that guy?", and then look objectively at the situation and reassess. This is not healthy.
>>
>>1643301
those brain worms sure are thrashing and writhing around in there. Seek help.
>>
>>1643302
Yes, this is exactly what I'm talking about. The mere act of not hating this man warrants this bizarre accusations of having worms in your brain. Hating someone for not hating the same person you hate, is mental illness.
>>
>>1643306
>24 karat copium
>>
>>1643245
Literally all of the operational and performance metrics he said the LV convention loop would meet have, in fact, not been met. Luckily, Las Vegas for once didn't fuck themselves and negotiated so that Boring has to pay for the entire thing since it doesn't operate as promised.
>>
>>1643245
>>1643247
You're the one denying the objective reality that the system absolutely does not function as promised.
>>
>>1643330
>Las Vegas for once didn't fuck themselves and negotiated so that Boring has to pay for the entire thing since it doesn't operate as promised.
based
>>
File: 803050342320701491.png (14 KB, 112x112)
14 KB
14 KB PNG
>>1636072
Let's take a train and take away the exact reason why it can be so heavy and so fast while still controllable! And only three people can fit per car until they can get self-driving working. Genius!
>>
>>1643331
what was promised?
>>1643330
the loop is capable of the metrics he said but speed was cut down for the time being as they are still developing and are not going to take rando non employees on the high speed development run. even if boring has to pay, the price tag was 53 million which is pretty good for a showpiece and test ground.
>>
>>1643326
Mental illness.
>>
>>1643244
perhaps that person is mixed-up with other examples of rail infrastructure that use a service tunnel (or whatever you'd care to call it) along with the operational tunnels. the examples that spring to mind are the trans-bay tube in SF, and the channel tunnel between britain and france.
>>
>>1643360
The system contractually promised to operate with passengers from the convention center at much higher speeds than are being done now or will be at any time in the near to medium term. It also promised a minimum throughput capacity in people/hour, which is physically impossible with regular Tesla vehicles being used now and with the headways they are talking about using. They haven't come anywhere remotely close to the metrics promised in the contract they signed with the city, and therefore the city doesn't have to compensate them monetarily for their work (a condition that is in the contract).
>>
>>1643360
This is why you're egriously unqualified to speak about matters of public relations. Advertising the system as a fully functioning, high capacity, automated people mover that will be ready for prime time imminently (which is exactly what Boring said it would be nice, not at some point in the durant future) and then failing on every single one of those things doesn't have a net positive effect on perceptions of the system you're trying to build.
>>
>>1636973
>I’ve been to Australia and the moon is upside down there
oh my god
>>
>>1636917
All they need is for the monorail to be extended to the airport. It's a 9 minute walk from the LVCC monorail station to the LVCC south hall entrance according to Google maps.
>>
>>1643750
>therefore the city doesn't have to compensate them monetarily for their work (a condition that is in the contract).
So Musk wrote up a contract proofing the city from being scammed, and the contract was honored? What a devious scammer he is!
>>
>>1636973
Normal tunnels have precautions for accidents inside the tunnel, this one hasn't. There isn't even room if you have to leave the car. The argument is indeed invalid.
>>
>>1637019
You aren't as smart as you think you are.
>>
>>1643921
See
>>1640768
>>1640766
Oops.

>>1643922
You’re right, I’m probably way smarter
>>
>>1642989
cars are already operating on autopilot, the human is just sitting there minding everything.
>>1637518
>random rainbow flashing lights
RGB lighting costs a tiny bit more than monochrome leds, would be a fool not to take the RGB option. thats like getting mad at poor people for owning smartphones when there is no other choice.
>>
File: file.png (74 KB, 820x218)
74 KB
74 KB PNG
>>1640955
the cars are temporary and a suitable replacement is coming along.
>>
>>1644016
This is literally nothing other than a handful of words in a year old press release. Tesla has not shown or even talked about any progress with the larger driverless vehicles.
>>
>>1644012
You are so fucking stupid that you're now actively defending a totally pointless application of changing the colors displayed by LEDs. There is literally zero functional purpose to having them do anything other than provide normally colored light in the tunnel.
>>
>>1643912
No, you utter fucking mongoloid. The city's lawyers wrote the contract and the city basically forced Boring to agree to it (and rightly so). Musk didn't push any of these conditions on the city. You literally have no idea what you're talking about.
>>
>>1644012
>RGB lighting costs a tiny bit more than monochrome leds, would be a fool not to take the RGB option
This is your brain on Musk
>>
>>1644054
>Tesla has not shown or even talked about any progress with the larger driverless vehicles.
why would they? they said they were doing it and are more than capable of it. companies dont always update people on every single thing they are doing until they determine its ready.
>>1644055
>>1644057
its more versatile than static lighting and doesnt cost much more either. they needed lighting and they went with the best option since the color of the light can also signal emergencies or unusual conditions. if they didnt install lights you fags would complain about the dark, if the lights were static you fags would complain about them not being rgb.
>>
>>1644059
You really should stab yourself I the throat. Tesla gives regular public updates on batteries and systems, on the semi, on the factories, on cyber truck, on fucking everything. But you're such a delusional fucking cocksucker that you refuse to even admit that and come to terms with the fact that the companies have not delivered on a single advertised operational aspect of this project. They also have deleted references from their websites to other loop projects that they were very publicly talking about, in Chicago and between Baltimore and DC, just to name a couple.
>>
>>1644059
>you fags would complain about them not being rgb.

No nigger, you're the only one coping here.
>>
File: file.png (1.35 MB, 621x952)
1.35 MB
1.35 MB PNG
>>1644092
>they arent talking about it which must mean they aren't working on it.
>wahhh the project changed from its original concept
you gotta keep something in the back pocket for when the stock prices down. and it really doesnt matter if it fell through in some other places, they are still going to do the strip.
>>1644094
>wahhhh he installed lights
RGB is the most normie shit ever now you have to be delusional if you think there was a better way to illuminate that tunnel.
>>
>>1643921
>Normal tunnels have precautions for accidents inside the tunnel,
Like 600 volts third rail to fry dismounted passengers?
>>
>>1644099
Why are you avoiding addressing the basic facts of the project? Why are you just making things up that aren't backed up by documented reality? Why are you making claims that have no evidence to back them and just aren't factual?
>>
>>1644099
No, they aren't going to build that. None of the blue line is approved or permitted, and that happening is heavily contingent on the performance metrics of the convention center loop and the small extension. But hey, keep lying, especially when the fucking nonsense you spew is instantly disprovable.
>>
>>1644099
The Boring company is building that system in the same way they're building the O'Hare to downtown Chicago express loop...
>>
>>1644099
You are praising their ability to light up the tunnel with pointless colors that serve no signalling or other function. Literally nobody is arguing that LEDs are bad for lighting up the tunnel. You're just strawmanning, which given your wholesale inability to function like a normal non-autistic person, isn't surprising.
>>
>>1644099
>Highly publicized project and tech
>Stop giving updates on it and cancel multiple similar projects
>Hurr durr they're just doing it all in secret
>>
>>1644188
>>1644187
>>1644186
>>1644185
>>1644184
holy fuck all that samefag
>>
>>1644189
Or maybe, just maybe when you say a bunch of shit that isn't accurate and you keep doubling down on all of it, people will call you on it. This is what a functional person would think. But since you seem to think that being wrong and then refusing to acknowledge facts is a reasonable strategy, I guess you can just keep doing that?
>>
>>1644187
those metros you love dont even have illumination. seems like an easy way to help people evacuate since you believe the cars catch fire all the time anyways.
>>1644184
you keep advocating for trains and other expensive crap which has already been tried numerous times for over 100 years and always comes back with the same inherent problems. if boring can sort out the safety and vehicle capacity issues (which they are more than capable of) there is no reason why this couldn't be a flexible cost effective solution. high capacity vehicles will already triple capacity and if they can get the clear to double the speed limit that will further cut down the travel time and increase capacity. having the other projects fall through and the entire vegas loop being contingent on the success of lvcc seems like plenty of incentive for elon to fix this.
>>
>>1644059
>if the lights were static you fags would complain about them not being rgb.
Nobody rational thinks this
>>
Saw this guy on /sci/ defending Musk’s shit too. Word to the wise, tell him to provide sources or he’ll just keep spouting this insane conjecture
>>
>>1644309
Which side in this clusterfuck of an argument has provided a single source?
>>
>>1636072
>Wheels underground
ngmi
>>
>>1644310
Quit deflecting fuckwad.
>>
>>1644199
Yes, metros do have lights in tunnels. But here you are, continuing to completely lie.
>>
>>1644199
Trains can move hundreds of time more people per hour than this system can. These tunnels also are a fraction of the size of transit tunnels, which is the only reason they are cheaper per mile. Boring has not provided a single iota of evidence to back the claims that the tunnels are cheaper or faster to build on an apples-to-apples basis and no expert in the field thinks that they would be. The technology is identical to what other tunnel builders use, just applied to a much smaller and less complex final product.
>>
>>1644319
Nice deflect, tard.
>>
>>1644056
Did you know that a contract is a mutual agreement? Nobody had the power to force him to sign a contract proofing him from scamming. If he intended to scam, and the contract was proofed from him doing so, he wouldn’t sign the contract.
>>
>>1644322
>Trains cannot move hundreds of time more people per hour than this system can,
if that were true then borings idea would've been dismissed a very long time ago. Rails cost a lot more to implement and maintain and they are very susceptible to malfunctions, embedding the power supply into the actual rail is yet another major point of failure. The size of a train also means that they have to be more spaced out since they take a lot more distance to slow down and stop.
Trains are not cheaper by the mile, boring outbid an austrian company for this project and they were proposing a rail type system which was over double what boring bid.
>>1644307
so why do you faggots keep crying about the lights then?
>>1644321
a few spaced out lights, metro tunnel still remains mostly dark.
>you keep lying
you keep saying im lying with no facts to back up your own claims, you sound like a stupid fucking woman.
>>
>supposed to be an airless tube for hypertrains
>is actually just a shitty tunnel for cars

good job elon
>>
>>1644187
>colors that serve no signalling or other function
ok retard
https://youtu.be/uEuPi5vvS7Q?t=52
>>
>>1644383
an incel virgin who loves elon and feels the need to defend him? i am shocked, shocked, shocked i tell you!
>>
>>1644422
>anti-car NUMTOT transit trannies coping this hard
>>
>>1644386
It was never supposed to be hyperloop.
>>
>>1644422
He’s still right in pointing out that trains are literally 19th century technology, not befitting of cities trying to build future proof modern cities. They’re extremely expensive and rigid, and time consuming to build as well. The idea of trains requires a massive amount of control over where people live, where they go, what times they ride, they way they behave on transit, and more, control that’s simply not possible for one institution to have. Futuristic forms of transit would adapt to the needs of people, rather than forcing people to adapt their needs around the pitfalls of train based transit.
>>
>>1644442
it's funny because of how fucking wrong you are
the cities of the future will have massive, dense public transportation networks and the ones that don't, like las vegas or dubai, will fall by the wayside
>>
>>1644442
i mean the london underground is 158 years old; the paris metro is 120 years old. both are still expanding, based on tactical decisions based on projected growth and whatnot.

>The idea of trains requires a massive amount of control over where people live, where they go, what times they ride, they way they behave on transit, and more, control that’s simply not possible for one institution to have
are you really trying to FACTS AND LOGIC away the concept of public transportation? please expand on this, because i've no idea what you are trying to say.
>>
>>1644443
I agree, they will have massive, dense public transportation. It just won’t be trains.
>>
and so help me if it's some 'well if trains are so great why can't i literally step outside my house and be in antarctica within five minutes hmmm? i thought not' nonsense.
>>
File: jet fans.png (55 KB, 1187x260)
55 KB
55 KB PNG
>>1636873
>>1636887
>>1636973
>>1636987
>>1637369
>>1637466
>>1641308
>>1641447
>>1641452
>>1641895
>>1642744
>>1643212
>>1636998
>>1637466
>>1641308
>>1643212
Why cant they add jet fans like any normal one way tunnel?
>>
>>1644451
yes it will be muskpods, #futurism, in technology we trust
>>
>>1644450
>train need large stations
>trains need to stop frequently which means you cant build too many stations
>trains cant pull over so any delay at one station carries over to all the other stations
>trains are heavy and cant accelerate or slow down quickly so you have to space them further apart and they have a lower average speed
>trains have larger turning radius so less flexibility for turns and change of direction
>train tracks are expensive to repair
>train tracks inhibit evacuations and rescue efforts
>trains cant short turn at any station they want
>trains cant work "on demand" and relocate assets for an unexpected surge in passengers
>population gathers around a few large stations driving up housing costs resulting in rich people having access to the best transit
>trains are only convenient during normie commuting hours
>>
>>1644460
Look at the transit density that Los Angeles managed to create over a huge sprawling area by using buses.
>>
>>1644468
well, there's a lot of things there, obviously i can't go through this one-by-one. do you think the loop solves these problems, or are they just ... problems, in general?
>>
>>1644470
Meanwhile the 9 mile purple line extension has been under construction for 10 years, isn’t expected to be finished until 2027, and cost 3 billion dollars. For the cost of one measly train you could have a bus route in every neighborhood of the city. So they do.
>>
>>1644442
this! the main reason i like these tunnels is that they are extremely modular and flexible since all the guidance and switching is handled by the vehicle itself. lowers the overall cost of the project since the tunnel just needs a flat surface to drive on and its easy enough to fan this sort of a system out.
>>1644471
these are things the loop solves and problems with trains in general. most important point is that vehicles in the system never have to come to a complete stop unless they are pulling over to pick up and drop off passengers. this makes it easier for the system to adapt to fluctuations in demand. if a baseball game lets out early the system could have unoccupied vehicles group up together and form something of a train of cars that could bypass all the stations and go directly to the people at the stadium. this kind of shit is unimaginable on a single train track going in one direction.
>>
>>1644470
how the fuck does greater LA not have a unified transit authority already? why the fuck does Torrance, California, have its own transit system?
>>
>>1644459
Why would they? Tunnels are short and quickly evacuated. I’d focus more on a sprinkler system.
>>
>>1644474
>>1644471
also means vehicles dont have to stop at stations if nobody is requesting a stop or pick up which means more direct routes if everyone in your module is going to the same stop.
>>
>>1644477
tunnel might be able to evacuate smoke on its own depending on elevation change. people go down the slope while the smoke travels up the slope, the fans still might be required depending on how their tests go.
>>
>>1644474
>fluctuations in demand
this seems to be the crux of your point. you seem to think this would ultimately operate like uber, only in dedicated tunnels. does that sound accurate?
>>
>>1644476
Not sure as to your question but Torrance goes to great lengths to differentiate themselves from the rest of LA, they even have their own local tv station. It seems like a nice place to live.
>>
>>1644484
so the answer is suburban autism and political shitflinging? every fucking time
>>
>>1644479
Are regular Teslas meant to be allowed in the same tunnel system as these pods? Because the same general idea would probably be much better with pods that ran steel wheels on tracks, powered through third rail, rather than battery powered rubber on road. Loop only makes sense if cars with appropriate software also can use the tunnels.
>>
>>1644487
Considering it’s neighbors are like Inglewood and Compton, I think it’s a smart move.
>>
because, ultimately, i don't see the practical difference between waiting for a train - or bus, or ferry, or any mode of transit, really - to arrive, and waiting for a muskmobile to come available and come to you.

i mean let's remember, 'on demand' doesn't mean 'guaranteed demand'. rhetorical question, in this scenario where a baseball game lets out early, does that mean all the available vehicles converge on the game station, leaving someone elsewhere out of luck? because ultimately, arguing about train systems' capacity and then sort of handwaving away the loop's capacity because AI or whatever will solve that somehow, seems foolish.
>>
>>1644483
that is pretty much how its supposed to work but eventually with larger vehicles. might not end up being as cheap as the existing public transit but it is capable of moving people a lot quicker and at the fraction of the cost of car ownership or using uber all the time. the system doesnt have to be 100% tunnels either so its cheap to expand into low density suburbs (where most of the vehicles in the city originate).
>>1644488
elon scrapped the idea of allowing privately owned cars on this thing a while ago. the system can utilize a mix of low and high capacity vehicles but they would all belong to the operator. in a lot of ways its effectively an ordinary road but with AI drivers who dont cause traffic issues since all the vehicles work cooperatively. most traffic jams are the result of a shitload of drivers being retarded.
>>1644490
it would be more like a hop and go route taxi, you sit in the first vehicle going to your destination and when the vehicle fills up or x time has passed it leaves and another one takes its place since the ai would let the controller know that its going to need another vehicle soon.
>>
>>1644492
>He didn't only fall for Memelons memes
>He fell for the AI meme as well
Get a brain implant
>>
>>1644482
There’s quite a lot of overhead space. If I were Musk, I think I’d consider installing a large duct overhead with inlets every 20 meters or so, which are normally closed but, in the event of a fire, automatically opens on either side of the fire and a fume extraction fan is turned on to pull smoke out separated from evacuees, pulling in fresh air from the entrance and exit of the tunnels. I think this would be completely redundant, as fires will happen so rarely it won’t happen at all, and if it happened nevertheless, evacuation would be so swift there probably wouldn’t be many casualties if any, but if it can mitigate people’s paranoia around the topic it could be the thing that removes resistance and allow widespread expansion. Then, after a few billion passenger miles through the system without incident, they could start building tunnels without this extra cost factor.
>>
>>1644493
You... have missed what’s been going on at the AI front lately?
>>
>>1644488
tracks lead to switches, switches lead to problems. can you think of a pod on rail system that is capable of pulling off the main path into a bay for loading before returning to the path so that pods behind it can still move?
>>1644494
duct system sounds complicated because you have to run them for the length of the tunnel. easier and cheaper to run some cable to a few spaced out jet fans. in a fire the fans blow the smoke down one end of the tunnel so people can evac the other way.
>>1644493
tesla is one of dozens of organizations working on vehicle AI. if their cars can mostly work without intervention on freeways and all those variables then a controlled environment like a tunnel is a cake walk.
>>
File: file.png (419 KB, 580x387)
419 KB
419 KB PNG
>>1644494
>>1644497
pic of jet fans btw. you can get than as low profile as 400mm thick, they used them all over for those mountain tunnels where adding more vents from up top is not realistic.
>>
>>1644497
>tracks lead to switches, switches lead to problems. can you think of a pod on rail system that is capable of pulling off the main path into a bay for loading before returning to the path so that pods behind it can still move?
are you seriously unaware of the existence of train lines that have both express and local service?
>>
>>1636917
>Mandalay Bay
Are we being comped?
>>
>>1644505
predetermined express service to predetermined stops. you would need to know ahead of time that the train needs to go on the express tracks. if other cities implement the loop with ride hailing tech it could find riders going to the same destination and put them in one vehicle. effectively everyone can get an express vehicle to their specific destination with no additional stops, not even other stops along the express lines. use your imaginations a little people.
>>
>>1644507
There is this thing called PRT
>>
>>1644506
everything's comped on the muskline bay bee
>>
>>1644508
it sucks and its too personal, that piece of shit at heathrow only seats 4 people and it looks like a bigger deathtrap than the boring tunnel if you ever youtube what a ride is like. if boring and tesla come out with that 16 seater then i dont see why this project is not viable in a city.
>>
>>1644512
>Too personal
say a system that use car
>16 seater
Problem sith the loop system in the current setup is that since each systems will have literally hundred of destinations and most stations are small with limited space for organization and waiting, suvh large vehicle would not be capable of waiting accumulating demand and the capacity is only meaningful if you have a large group of people going together
>>
>>1644497
>can you think of a pod on rail system that is capable of pulling off the main path into a bay for loading before returning to the path so that pods behind it can still move?
Yes.
>>
>>1644516
could operate local routes and routes to specific destinations at peak times. ai could also corral people with similar destinations into one vehicle so one vehicle with 16 people would only need to make 3 stops to offload everyone. that is what would make this system the car killer, its ability to adapt like that. ai could learn typical passenger patterns or detect above average demand and allocate resources as needed. also nothing to say the system cant have high and low cap vehicles.
>>
>>1644497
>duct system sounds complicated because you have to run them for the length of the tunnel.
One duct is not complicated.
>easier and cheaper to run some cable to a few spaced out jet fans.
But also shittier
>in a fire the fans blow the smoke down one end of the tunnel so people can evac the other way.
People will evacuate both ways, and jet fans will just turbulate the air, and bring smoke down to the breathers (people). And it doesn’t exactly scream innovation, which is Musk’s companies’ big thing.
>>
>>1644519
Then it would simply be marshrutka in tunnel?
>>
>>1644520
i need to read up on this system, what is the industry name for it? for example my proposal is the use of "longitudinal jet fans".
>>1644522
could be that, could be a mix of share and private hire. main difference is all the vehicles are ai so you dont have the drawback of low skill drivers causing more traffic problems as all the vehicles are working cooperatively to maintain a steady flow. could even alleviate congestion on the existing transit system when run in parallel since people who are willing to pay a little premium will just use that instead.
>>
>>1644522
Effectively yes and they would even be priced similar to what wikipedia said. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshrutka
>>
>>1644495
A whole bunch of ifs
as always
>>
>>1636072

When do they turn on the hyper loop to make them go super fast?
>>
>>1644599
Hyperloop and loop are essentially two unrelated things nowadays
>>
>>1644603

Well what do you mean!?

They just have to the program setup and vetted and ironed out and then turn on the magnetic guidance on the walls and then the Tesla's will be flying through that tunnel superfast.

They will be looping so fast the passengers won't be able to board and exit the cars fast enough!
>>
File: lol.gif (779 KB, 389x259)
779 KB
779 KB GIF
>>1636072
Holy kek, this is peak retardation.
>>
Since when has this board become infested by musktards? Musk is the anti thesis to public transport.

Aa for my opinion, I am glad this tunnel was buikg. Frying a few muskrats in a lithium fire can only be a good thing. Besides, ridding the world of retards that think 2 ton cars with resource intensive batteries is the solution to climate change can only be a good thing.
>>
>>1644589
“No”, in other words.
>>
>>1644606
well *obviously* you have to research the underground tunnels before you can unlock the 'personal above-ground tunnels' in the tech tree, stupid. then it's just a case of grinding out your research points on site-to-site transportation so you can unlock the 'go to space' expansion, the self-evident goal of our species. i f*cking love science
>>
>>1636072
I've read that the Boring company's passenger quota agreement can't be met with their current fleet, meaning they'll keep getting fined until they deploy the 12 car vehicles.
>>
>>1644744
*12-seat vehicles.
>>
>>1644391
You're fucking retarded. The purple and pink and most of the other colors the strip lights in the tunnel can turn don't signal anything. It's unreal how much you insist on being objectively wrong.
>>
>>1644383
Why do you keep making shit up that isn't remotely close to true? The world would unequivocally be a better place if you were held down while your skull was caved in with a claw hammer.
>>
>>1644383
The point on tunneling is absolutely true. Boring hasn't proved or even provided any preliminary evidence that their tunnels are faster to build or less expensive relative to their smaller size and lower complexity. This is a fact. You can keep denying it all you want and keep acting like a maladjusted freak, but that doesn't change the facts.
>>
>>1644864
>red and green dont signal anything
>>1644866
i love watching you liberal pussies seethe like that
>no actual substance just deflecting arguments and edgy fantasies
>>1644868
they just built a solution for 4 times less than what the second place competitor was asking. you just keep coming back deflecting and parroting the same shit all the other pinkos are seething on about and its hilarious.
>>1644647
>Musk is the anti thesis to public transport.
but its a public transport project. just because its not catering directly to the bottom most rungs of society doesnt mean its a bad project.
>>
>>1644864

What do you mean? They help guide the Teslas through the tunnel so they can be programmed to zip through at high speeds and use the tunnel lights to guide them!

There will also be MULTIPLE failsafes built in!
>>
>>1636875
Ideally they would not use Lion and instead use solid state batteries, but those are still in development and haven't really hit mass production yet
>>
>No emergency exits
Povo tier I’ll stick with the danish
>>
>>1645084

The exits would Fuck with the hyper loop! They are not needed!
>>
really just fancy highways lul
>>
>>1636072
>>1636072
I already hate taxis enough, putting them underground won’t solve that
>>
>>1636917
the absolute state of """"public"""" transportation in North America
>>
>>1642882
i see the point you're making and i fundamentally agree with it except the point of being wealthy so you simply hire foreign private companies to build infrastructure. the US is more than capable of producing its own domestic high speed rail tech if the car lobby wasn't so fucking powerful but using another nation's tech is admitting defeat and simply ingratiating people like elon.
>>
>>1645410
>using another nation's tech is admitting defeat
'it wasn't invented on this particular patch of dirt so it's useless and i don't want it and i don't even need it anyway' is a foolish, sour-grapesy attitude
>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9kpyGqKwJk
>>
>>1642882
He lives in Texas now and is building his own ancap city on the mexican border to launch mexicans into space and make them "illegal aliens".
>>
>>1645419
you're inviting further private interest groups to take over the development and infrastructure of transport networks which should be particularly focused on as public future investments rather than short term profit ventures.
>>
>>1645440
that's well and good, but i don't see how that's related to using 'another nation's tech'. (which is a foolish concept to begin with in this globalised economy of ours - like i'm sure you're aware of the insanely complex worldwide logistics around car manufacturing and assembly, for example)

but, ok, putting that aside, if (grossly oversimplified of course) tapping JR on the shoulder and saying 'hey, show us how to do the shinkansen thing you've been doing for like sixty years now' is a not-good idea, what's your alternative?
>>
>>1645445
just go straight to maglev, HSR is outdated now.
>>
>>1645447
by what measure
>>
>>1645453
the measure of the progress of society
>>
>>1645453
Maglev is further along on the Civilization IV tech tree.
>>
File: 1280px-Amtrak_acela.png (533 KB, 1280x995)
533 KB
533 KB PNG
>>1645447
>>1645445
Amtrak desperately needs to create their own maglev route in the north east corridor, something like the Acela, but probably with fewer stops. JR has been developing expertise on this subject for 50 years, just hire them ffs.
>one station for boston
>one station for NYC area
>one station for bmore
>possibly cut trenton to make NYC-Philly/DC trips faster
also rebuild nyc penn because it sucks ass, maybe tear down madishit square gardens
>>
>>1645648
illustrated, seems similar to the station density of the chuo shinkansen
>>
>>1645648
JR Central already created a company named Northeast Maglev to advocate the construction of Magkev along NEC.
>>
>>1637019
>people will come to harm, just like the roughly one million people who die in transportation related accidents annually already
when people die in those the incident is studied and improvements are made
you cant make an airliner without tcas becuse we know what happens. this is making a tunnel with no safety systems when we already know better

the inherent risks of transportation arent comparable to known yet unmitigated risks
>>
>>1646497
You can make airliner without escape tunnels.
>>
>>1646497
I take it for granted that when the first Loop accident happens in a billion passenger kilometer's time, the incident will be studied and improvements made.

Teslas have TCAS built in already, and they will be engaged in the Loop.

The tunnels have plenty of safety features:
1) They're short, so nearest exit is always close.
2) All passengers are situated in their own emergency escape pods (Teslas) which will haste to the nearest exit in the event of an accident.
3) Accidents are extremely unlikely to happen, as the Loop is isolated from pretty much all primary causes of automobile accidents on the surface, which includes (but are not limited to): Shitty/drunk drivers, snow/rain/glare, darkness, animals/people/cyclists in the roadway, crossing traffic, debris and potholes, etc.
4) Known dangers associated with underground rail is severely mitigated or eliminated completely, which included (but are not limited to): Third rail in the event of an underground evacuation, exposure to crazy people and violent criminals on the platform or in the rail car, etc.

The Loop, as it is right now, is probably the safest form of transportation yet invented.

>But muh lithium fire!

The frequency by which those battery packs spontaneously catch fire while driving on a straight, smooth road under perfect temperature conditions is so asymptotically close to zero that it cannot be measured. If you're scared of that, you should be absolutely petrified of house cats.
>>
>>1646558
>I take it for granted that when the first Loop accident happens in a billion passenger kilometer's time, the incident will be studied and improvements made.
given that their cars still crash into fire trucks and semis and drive onto train tracks, i genuinely doubt that
>>
>>1644477
>sprinklers
>in that aborted Slip n Slide of a tunnel

no thank you. how about i just never drive in it and be safer that way, thanks.
>>
>>1646568
Are you claiming that no other cars crash into semis, or that when it happens to Teslas there are no investigations? Because you’re wrong either way, and only Tesla investigations leads to actual mitigating interventions to prevent future occurrences.
>>
>>1646602
By all means, drive above ground where the roads are never wet and slippery, and accidents never happens.
>>
>>1646639
>drive
how about you kill yourself you reddit cager fuck
>>
>>1646558
>escape pods
you're not in space.
>3) Accidents are extremely unlikely to happen, as the Loop is isolated from pretty much all primary causes of automobile accidents on the surface, which includes (but are not limited to): Shitty/drunk drivers, snow/rain/glare, darkness, animals/people/cyclists in the roadway, crossing traffic, debris and potholes, etc.
so are trains, yet they don't skimp on safety features
>4) Known dangers associated with underground rail is severely mitigated or eliminated completely, which included (but are not limited to): Third rail in the event of an underground evacuation, exposure to crazy people and violent criminals on the platform or in the rail car, etc.
Same logic as a flat earther. Studies show fire is the biggest hazzard, not "crazy people".
In november 2000, 155 people died in a fire on a cable hauled funicular, which had less fire safety because "it has no engine therefore can't have a fire". A fan heater caught fire, the smoke killed everybody who was in the ascending burning train, the descending train which had nothing to do with and some people at the top station: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaprun_disaster

Also why you fear so much having a few white people in a room? Not even in Latin America you hear people being afraid of crowds. Only Americans fear meeting each other.
>>
>>1646558
few jet fans can easily mitigate fire hazards. if a fire happens the fan blows smoke down one end of the tunnel while people escape in the other direction just like how existing tunnels already work.
>>1646653
people died in that incident because the doors were faulty and the glass was plexi.
>>
>>1646653
>so are trains, yet they don't skimp on safety features
>In november 2000, 155 people died in a fire on a cable hauled funicular,
If only the funicular company would’ve put the passengers in several smaller, independently operated cars, which could spirit their passengers away from the fire. But I suppose only companies who skimp on safety features does that.

>Also why you fear so much having a few white people in a room?
13% and 50%
>Not even in Latin America you hear people being afraid of crowds.
I’m sure Latin Americans always feel safe.
>Only Americans fear meeting each other.
Latin Americans are Americans, anon.
>>
>>1646553
heh

>>1646558
the funny part is they actually dont. the fact that the 'self driving' tech in a current Tesla cant handle a closed course tell you everything you need to know about the current state and future of 'fsd'
>>
>>1643569
Yes.
>>
>>1641316
Actually that would be dope as duck, especially with good pavement and level ground
>>
>>1642987
Fuck off Elon, you can take my crx from my cold dead hands
>>
>>1643240
Dude that probably is him. He's an autistic fuck who likes anime and spaceships and shit, of course he would be here. Don't get me wrong, i kinda like the guy, but he is a fucking nonce when it comes to public transportation
>>
>>1646653
crowds at everyday places like train platforms is peasant tier, loop system allows for more frequent departures which prevents crowding. crowding also causes issues in evacuations.
>>
Reminder that this is the Musk shill in this thread. I’ve compared the language from the posts to his videos and I’m convinced the guy who runs A Boring Revolution is in this thread

Go make another PowerPoint you balding bong fuck
>>
>>1646710
>level ground
no fuck you, camber is the best
>>
>>1646710
>>1646844
you're both wrong, the best is 'dad has his hands on your shoulders and tells you you're safe, while reminding you how proud he is of you'
>>
>>1636875
Their contingency plan in case of emergency is the car tries to make it to the station because the tunnel is too narrow for the doors to open.
>>
>>1637004
it's actually funny you chose to post this image becuse that is a perfect example of what happens when you ignore basic rules relating to safety under the guise of being more efficient
>>
>>1646697
>the 'self driving' tech in a current Tesla cant handle a closed course
Haven’t sat in a Tesla in a few years, have we?
>>
>>1646938
Lies.
>>
File: onehundredpercentsafe.jpg (86 KB, 700x394)
86 KB
86 KB JPG
>>1646945
No, the reason that image is funny is because it perfectly illustrates what is an inevitable occasional consequence when we choose to fly thin walled aluminium tubes at close to the speed of sound at 33,000ft as a mode of transportation. Every single shithead in this thread knows about that risk, are aware it will never be mitigated to zero, are free to refrain from flying, yet still choose to fly. But by golly, if there is even a hypothetical chance that anyone can come to harm in the Loop, then nobody should be allowed to use it.
>>
File: 1532525926335.gif (1.57 MB, 400x225)
1.57 MB
1.57 MB GIF
>>1646639
Not even close to the point I was making but here, I'll be a retard and respond to your ebic post:

If a car crash happens above ground, I can just go around it or walk away. If it rains, who the fuck cares.

Same thing happens in a normal multi-lane tunnel, its fine.

Now try to keep up here; if a tesla (or any car) goes up in flames in the midge-tunnel, and the sprinklers go off (implying they have them, which they dont) and smoke and whatever toxic shit begins to fill the air, and there's barely enough room for even a fucking car to fit, where am I gonna go, and how will I get there? Will I scramble over other peoples speeding cars? Will they stop in time? How will 'those' stupid fucks get out? Run on the walls? Pray? Dig straight up?
Combine this with the fact that fire eats air and the extremely small size of the midge-tunnel and you have yourself a (potentially) partially flooded, toxic smoke-filled, oxygen deprived tube that potentially has a car coming to execute you at whatever speeds the sleeping driver has it set to.

How will the fire department put it out? Teslas love to burn so I doubt just some shitty imaginary sprinklers will do the job.

And finally, how will the wreckage be cleared, once the fire somehow goes out.

I hope you enjoyed my fucking ted talk you ADD riddled zoomer.
>>
>>1646782
what are you talking about, that's just a picture of M*sk before he got hair implants
>>
>>1646994
There's a huge difference between "Accidents will always happen, we can't reduce the chances to 0" and "There are safety measures that could be taken but we didn't take them"
>>
>>1647114
>"There are safety measures that could be taken but we didn't take them"

What's funny is that you can't think of a single industry for which this quote does not apply.
>>
>>1647043
>If a car crash happens above ground, I can just go around it or walk away.
There is nothing for a car in a Loop to crash into, but if it should happen in a Loop out of beta, the cars in front of the wreck will proceed to the end of the tunnel. The cars behind will stop and reverse out before the occupants realised what's going on.

>If it rains, who the fuck cares.
Probably the occupants of the hydroplaning car, and the parents of the children mowed down by it.

>Same thing happens in a normal multi-lane tunnel, its fine.
Funny how you think it's fine when people are roasted to death in a regular tunnel, since the simians operating the vehicles cannot communicate telepathically and will be unable to reverse out and away from the burning 18 wheeler lying sideways across all lanes, blocking their way.

>if a tesla (or any car) goes up in flames in the midge-tunnel
A tesla randomly catching fire while driving down a smooth road under optimal temperature conditions is virtually unheard of.
>and the sprinklers go off (implying they have them, which they dont) and smoke and whatever toxic shit begins to fill the air, and there's barely enough room for even a fucking car to fit, where am I gonna go, and how will I get there?
You will go out, and you will go by car. If you are in the car that caught fire you may be that one casualty per 10,000,000,000 passenger miles, which is a very acceptable death rate. If you don't like those odds, you can drive on the surface for a death rate of 150 per 10 bn passenger miles.
>Will I scramble over other peoples speeding cars?
If you're on foot, the tunnel will be empty.
>Will they stop in time?
Yes.
1/2
>>
>>1647131
>How will 'those' stupid fucks get out?
By self driving car.
>Run on the walls?
No, by sitting in their self driving cars.
>Pray?
The cars drive themselves, so sure, why not. Or read a book. Shitpost on 4chan. Whatever you want to do.
>Dig straight up?
If you're playing Minecraft on your Nintendo Switch, sure. If not, then no.
>Combine this with the fact that fire eats air and the extremely small size of the midge-tunnel and you have yourself a (potentially) partially flooded, toxic smoke-filled, oxygen deprived tube that potentially has a car coming to execute you at whatever speeds the sleeping driver has it set to.
All cars will speed *away* from the wreck, and only the occupants of the wreck will find themselves on foot in the tunnel. Try to keep up, anon.
>How will the fire department put it out?
They probably won't, as there will likely be sprinkler systems installed in the Loop out of beta.
>Teslas love to burn so I doubt just some shitty imaginary sprinklers will do the job.
For lithium fires, the prescribed treatment is plenty of water. A regular sprinkler system would go a long way, but even better would be something triggered by thermal cameras.

>And finally, how will the wreckage be cleared, once the fire somehow goes out.
It won't. It will just stay there forever, and they'll have to bore another tunnel. That's one of the downsides to this system.

>I hope you enjoyed my fucking ted talk you ADD riddled zoomer.
I'm gen X, fuck you very much, and I have full blown ADHD.

Fin.
>>
File: 1476379896243.jpg (70 KB, 1280x720)
70 KB
70 KB JPG
>>1647131
>>1647132
Alright, I can appreciate this. Thank you for making me laugh.

[spoiler]I admit I didn't consider the cars in the Loop just going backwards to reverse out of the clogged Loop.[/spoiler]
>>
>>1646988
I have literally this week and they can't do anything without constant intervention other that drive on the freeway.
>>
>>1647187
Lol, ok.
https://youtu.be/9_9rsDntocI
>>
>>1646994
>inevitable
that pic is of the plane with the footballers that crashed becuse the pilot decided he was a 10000iq genius and tried to od a 1580mi flight in a plane with a 1600mi range
so ignoring basic safety procedures when we already know what happens when you do
it mirrors the mindset behind the tunnel exactly
>>
>>1646988
>Haven’t sat in a Tesla in a few years, have we?
I dont have to
if it could these cars wouldn't even have wheels and would restructure the seating to fit more passengers
>>
>>1647221
>camera inside the car transmitting live feed to tesla
why are early adopters such weirdos?
>>
>>1647221
Bitch, the NHTSA literally won't let them calm it Full Self Driving because it doesn't work as claimed. Tesla had to totally change its claims about the system to avoid legal liability. It doesn't work on surface streets without the driver having to retake control multiple times per minute on average. No amount of your cunty whining changes that fact.
>>
>>1647245
Yes, it is inevitable that serious accidents will happen on occasion when you conduct trillions of passenger miles per year in flying aluminum tubes.
>>
>>1647247
Model 3 and Model Y are equipped with a Cabin Camera that is located above the rear-view mirror and turned off by default. If you enable the Cabin Camera, a short video clip will be captured and shared with Tesla following a safety event such as a collision or an advanced emergency braking (AEB) event.
>>
>>1647246
Make sense next time.

>>1647251
Those goal posts moved quickly. It was a response to
>the 'self driving' tech in a current Tesla cant handle a closed course
Video clearly showes Tesla’s self driving software can handle most complex traffic situations among simian operated vehicles, which is quite a few steps above “cant handle a closed course”. Bitch.
>>
>>1647119
Yes, but here it's much more significant.
>>
>>1647539
So if it can handle a closed course, why are they manually driven in the tunnels?
>>
>>1647548
Yet you can’t think of a single one. How about that.

>>1647551
Liability. It’s a system in beta. I don’t know to what extent the driver is actually driving or just minding the autopilot and just making sure passengers aren’t fucking in the cars, but if you think the basic Tesla autopilot isn’t capable of steering the car through that tunnel, you don’t know what you’re talking about.
>>
>>1647539
Why are you still lying you ignorant fucking nigger? Tesla vehicles literally cannot and do not handle self driving on surface streets. There is a mountain of data to back this up. It's not self driving if you have to fucking take the wheel every 20 seconds.
>>
>>1647600
*chuckles* Typically unintelligent remark from a gas guzzling simian such as yourself. Why don't you try the cruise control setting on your lame Challenger or whatever since advanced AI-based navigational systems are too far beyond your comprehension.
>>
>>1647600
Goal posts.
>>
>>1636873
>Car starts on fire
>be stuck inside of a 6 foot wide fucking underground tunnel so I can't even open the doors or climb out the windows
>die trapped in burning Lithium inferno that they can't even recover my teeth from
>>
>>1647562
>It’s a system in beta
it's a closed system not the open road so its status doesn't matter. if you cant have the cars driving themselves them the system is fucking hopeless. if it actually had sensible tech like lidar and not the camera meme they've backed themselves into then they could do it easily
>>
>>1647629
Ridiculously rare event. You're more likely to be murdered in a church.

>>1647638
Its status very much do matter. Any successful project was insufficient at some point during its development. That's not to say that an insufficient project will inevitably become a success, but to point to shortcomings that's just a matter of simple engineering to eliminate in a project known to be in beta is... stupid.

The camera based system they have is already more than capable of navigating down a Loop tunnel. If you think they're not, you cannot possibly have much time behind the wheel of a Tesla. Having driven a Tesla equipped with the basic autopilot feature for more than 50,000 km, I *know* that the Vegas Loop is exactly the kind of visual surface against which it will navigate better than most humans at this point.
>>
File: Volvo.jpg (31 KB, 590x431)
31 KB
31 KB JPG
>>1647119
>What's funny is that you can't think of a single industry for which this quote does not apply.
*blocks your path*
>>
>>1647638
>lidar
>sensible
>not a meme
Whew lad
>>
>>1647686
VÖLVÖ
>>
>>1647686
No paths are blocked. There are infinity safety measures Volvo could take but don't.
>>
>>1647551
its supervised autopilot, the driver is just there because they are still testing and developing
>>1647539
the teslas also communicate with each other so they already know each others location and intentions.
>>1647251
>surface streets
no shit its not going to be as reliable up there, perfectly fine for the tubes.
>>1647187
>>1647221
waymo also has a self driving car https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__EoOvVkEMo
>>
>>1647807
Name one
>>
>>1647969
autopilot
>>
>>1648465
are you actually trying to imply Autopilot™ in its current state is superior to a skilled and experienced driver? because that would be pretty cringe bro
>>
>>1648469
statistically speaking collisions would be reduced 90% if the vast majority of cars on the road were operating under AI control. majority of collisions are caused by driver error aka risk taking and rule breaking, things which AIs dont do.
>>
>>1648465
Volvo doesn't sell vaporware
Volvo sells shit that works
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vI9EIjUx20I
>>
>>1649504
Unlike Elon Musks Scammobiles who can't see a stationary object
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfmAG4dk-rU
>>
>>1649504
>its vaporware now
another goal post move





Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.