 Hello and welcome to NewsClick. Today we have our show Talking Science and Tech and we will talk about the Hyperloop experiment and I am calling it experiment advisedly which has been done recently in Nevada. We have with us the Raghunandan who has been following transportation technologies for quite some time. Raghunandan, if we look at this case which has been doubted as a test run, it seems to be a very preliminary exercise and best it can be called proof of concept. But really nothing more than that. It was only roughly about 100 miles per hour that even 100 years back a steam engine could have done that. So that's not particularly shall be exciting technology if you look at just the test parameters. So what does it really show? Yeah, I absolutely agree with you because in fact even as a proof of concept I believe it is inadequate because the whole concept of the Hyperloop is that you accelerate up to very high speeds and then you really don't put in too much energy in running the system because the momentum itself is expected to carry the pod forward. So I mean that's where the real energy balance of the Hyperloop system and its supposed advantage over other systems would have come into play. So this time all that we know is that yes you can run a pod inside a tube. Beyond that I don't see how much more has been done and I have not seen yet the data of what the pressure was like inside that tube. How much of low pressure or etc was created. Let's take a step back and talk about the Hyperloop itself as a technology. It's supposed to be near vacuum conditions so the air resistance is much lower. It's supposed to be magnetic levitation so you don't have rails you're really running on a cushion of magnetic repulsion as it was so that you the whole rail coaches above the so-called tracks and then there is no resistance except air resistance then what you're talking about is the air resistance is in fact the major component of the problem and if you have then a vacuum then of course the air resistance is not there. So the magnetic levitation which is that used is also being used in different places that runs into the problem of cost of transportation when the air resistance becomes high and high speeds it does. So this does not show that part of it can actually do high speeds and the resistance is there for shown to be much that doesn't happen. That's right. So without that you've not really proved the concept that the Hyperloop was supposed to be. And the other part of it is that this is basically just half a kilometer track in Nevada and there you have this pod which had two people in it and so all that you showed is that you can run a pod in magnetic levitation. Now again magnetic levitation Maglev is a known concept and I think this is this has been there for almost 75 years that as a concept and we have had functioning maglev systems from 70s onwards. Yeah that's right. So the maglev concept is quite different of course from what the Hyperloop was supposed to be. The Hyperloop incorporates the magnetic concept by having induction motors around the outer tube through which the pod is propelled. So the two things that you would expect from a Hyperloop demonstration is number one acceleration to high speeds inside the outer shell of the tube and then from there the continued propulsion largely using momentum and not requiring much energy input in terms of this. Now clearly in half a kilometer you're not going to either achieve the high speeds that you're looking for nor would you have constructed the low pressure near vacuum conditions which will enable onward propulsion using largely momentum already generated which would then give you high speeds at relatively lower cost. So neither of those we have seen so far. So do we then see at least that a tube through which this works as distinct from the normal maglev that we are seeing around at least that has been. Yeah so at least you have seen that inside a tube you can have a pod going and it's not clashing against the sides. I mean that's but you know the fact is that till now over about 400 tests have been conducted by Virgin Hyperloop by HTT by the former Hyperloop one company without people sitting inside has already demonstrated travel of the pod inside the tube which demonstrates the thing. So all you've done is you've put two people inside to show that yeah it can carry people but the same thing could have been done by using two dummies as well which also has been done by the way. So it's a bit like the manned moon exploration the as it was argued before during and later you didn't really have to have human beings going to moon you could just send cameras grams and so on which is what we have done subsequently. But the idea of the Hyperloop is of course it's supposed to revolutionize transport. Now coming back to what is the difference in terms of performance of a Hyperloop system if it does come about in terms of the speeds and what is it supposed to do in terms of cost of transportation. Is it significantly different in terms of speeds first and then of course we'll come to the first question. The two aspects are the speeds expected to be reached are in the range of 1000 to 1200 kilometers per hour. Those are the expected speeds expected to be transonic speeds which is why the name Hyperloop came about because it is supposed to be well not really hypersonic but transonic at least. So about 1200 kilometers per hour speeds which then would mean as I said earlier if you reach that kind of speed then the rest of the journey is expected to be covered largely by the momentum already generated not requiring further inputs of energy and that is what differentiates it from either maglev or high speed rail which require continued inputs of energy for the journey. Here because you've got these near vacuum tubes and air resistance is so low once you've propelled the pod and achieved high speeds it virtually runs on its own for the rest of the journey. So the economy was supposed to lie in lower running costs substantially lower running costs that was number one and the claim was that it would cost about 40 to 50 million dollars per kilometer in terms of the capital costs of the infrastructure whereas you are getting high speed rail or maglev systems approximately at 10 to 12 million dollars. So the argument of Elon Musk and the other champions of Hyperloop has been that countries which seek to establish high speed rail may as well spend a little more money and establish Hyperloop which according to the promoters then although this is mimicking rail systems the time taken would be comparable to air travel that was the selling point because at 1200 kilometers per hour you're aiming at something like a Delhi Bombay run in about 45 minutes or under an hour which is shorter even than your air travel. So that was supposed to be the selling point and then if you compare it with rail you've got a let us say Chennai Bangalore journey which takes today by about four hours by Indian so-called superfast express and may take about two hours by high speed rail etc. The promise was that this kind of distance of 400 odd kilometers you would be able to do in half an hour to 40 minutes. So these are the claims for the kind of systems that were there in terms of time speeds and costs. Quickly on the question of course of the speeds the current Maglev systems looks like it can scale up to 600 to 800 kilometers speed my kilometers per hour and 600 is sort of near 600 kilometers per hour speeds are being achieved in the trial runs already so it's not something which is very far away and also if you look at the cost what you talk about the capital cost of course as we know capital costs always go up. Yeah, yeah exactly. Land for the system if you say X it ends up it becomes absolutely X and that we have seen even after systems but the Maglev is now relatively established technology in fact Chennai airport to Chennai city center this has been running for some time and earlier also it was running in UK and I think another place Germany. Germany both are not commercially running. Even Russia had a system that's also not commercially running. But the reality is that Maglev systems now have been tried out tested extensively and therefore what Japan is doing what South Korea is doing and what China is doing all of them seem to have gone now to the direction that they can put it as a part of the high speed railway systems. So in that sense this would be the Hyperloop would be completely something quite different and a lot of new challenges which would have to go through. So there is a difference between the maturity of the Maglev systems today and what the Hyperloop would try to do. Yeah absolutely the only thing about the Maglev is like you said the current only commercially running Maglev is the Shanghai system over 7 to 8 kilometers distance. The other ones have not really established themselves commercially partly because there is already a reasonably well established network of high speed rail in Europe and they did not see such great advantage in substituting those with Maglev systems. So they seem to be quite happy doing this because Maglev will then involve new infrastructure etc etc. So they didn't see the percentage of shifts. China has always been a slightly different case including in high speed rail. China did not have a very extensive railway system earlier to begin with so they leapfrogged into high speed rail and they were prepared to invest the capital in doing that whereas most of the other countries had a fairly well laid out railway system which they partly transformed into high speed rail and partly added new completely new infrastructure and the same steep seems to be the case with the Maglev system where the Chinese have felt more free in doing that as well. The other issue with this regard is that the Hyperloop system although it is frequently compared with high speed rail and Maglev systems essentially really competes with Aetra in terms of the time factor like I was giving you examples of the Delhi Mumbai etc. thing. So the real comparison in terms of time saving and cost is in relation to air travel and the sales argument of the Hyperloop promoters including Elon Musk is when you are getting the advantage of air travel like speeds and times why would you invest comparable amounts of money on high speed rail although as we've discussed the cost can be actually quite substantially higher than high speed rail could be as much as four to five times if not more. The other question that you asked maybe we could discuss this in a separate part which is the kinds of problems you are likely to encounter with Hyperloop which have not been foreseen so far and which could then raise substantial entry barriers, post problems in terms of regulatory systems and both these put together would further push up costs compared to what we know today. Just a quick comment on the Chinese issue they have 36,000 kilometers in stone as of this year already and therefore they really are far ahead of the rest of the world in terms of high speed rail and the Maglev also both they and the Japanese seems to be quite into it. They also have they're not looking at long distances also they're looking at maybe what the Japanese are doing from Osaka to Tokyo. China would also do Shanghai to Bijik. Now there of course this is an infrastructure cost that you are building so the question when Elon Musk says why would you do that when you can actually do a Hyperloop why would you do Maglev and so on. The argument would be that this has to run on the ground therefore you have huge issues regarding land acquisition getting right of the way building that infrastructure and so on unlike air travel for example. So if you're going to get the same advantage the only argument could be how many people can travel the number of people traveling could be much more which doesn't seem to be the case either and in fact one of Elon Musk's winning points in this it is argument is supposedly you can go park your car inside the pod and then drive off of the other side which could appeal to Americans but rest of the world doesn't seem to be very interested in this particular concept. Yeah I mean that's the other advantage which Hyperloop unlike the air travel is expected to benefit by giving you connection in the heart of the city rather than on the outskirts like you have with an airport it's like high speed rail you go into the heart of the city and get into the train and like that you'll be able to get into your pod in a Hyperloop tube right in the heart of the city so it'll take you from one business district to the other district. That works if it is a Los Angeles and San Francisco kind of scenario but if you're going from Delhi to Mumbai or going from Delhi to Chennai that may not be the major argument because then the Shanghai road route which is you go to the airport Pudong airport and then you go to Shanghai city center eight minutes in a maglev might be a better option you know if you're interested in shortening that journey then a maglev to the center of the city probably is a better investment than investing in the whole route. You know there's one issue which we haven't talked about the United States has the most old infrastructure as far passenger railways is concerned. The speeds are abysmal in fact India is almost there with the United States on this if you take entire Europe virtually very few countries have the kind of speeds that you see on the American railway systems and therefore Hyperloop suddenly becomes something which is new attractive and is going to give them you know really even if they give them 600 kilometers it would be something very striking because the speeds over there is 160 to 200 kilometers it becomes very fast and most of the system doesn't work on that either. No just a small correction there just like you're comparing 600 kilometers you say for the maglev that's the maximum speed you reach in high speed rail the 150 to 200 kilometers that you're saying is an average speed which you may reach maximum speeds of 350 to 400 kilometers so the comparison apples to apples would be high speed rail gives you maximum speed of 400 and maglev seems to be able to reach maximum speeds of 600 or thereabouts. At the moment they're reaching in test tracks they're reaching about 550 odd kilometers yeah and they say that they can reach here more so the average future you could talk about apples to apple the promise of hyperloop versus the promise of maglev maglev says 600 to 600 to 800 hyperloop says 1200 to 1400 these are the promise actually implemented at the moment maglev is about both in the different places they have run it on a test track of almost 600 kilometers that's what i'm saying that's what i'm saying so that's not the promise that is the actual that's what i'm saying so 600 is what they have reached in maglev and the french high speed rail the the TGT trains regularly reach 400 max speeds which then averages out over the distance to 250 to 300 thereabouts like the shinkansen trains in japan so the comparison i think there in terms of speeds the hyperloop is not claiming only this kind of a difference they are claiming three times the speed and therefore shortening of time considerably like the example i gave you of a deli to mumbai kind of travel at about 45 minutes to 50 minutes i got i get that but the point is nothing jumps to the top of the tree in one lead so there is a good path so if for instance you go to hyperloop 1200 kilometers well you have to first they've started at 100 miles okay then they have to go from 100 miles to 1200 they won't do it in one loop shall we say so therefore the issue is really if you take realistically you might see 600 to 800 as the next step implementation wise if it succeeds so that is the the infrastructure would have to be based on that yeah so so all that we honestly all i'm saying is the united states there seems to be the need for a high speed rail particularly given the speeds that you see the united states today and in terms of intercity if you have a set of cities in which you can connect them to high speed rail then perhaps it would really help the united states in terms of transportation and for that hyperloop or maglev if that is the option then at least it's a something which is starting afresh because they don't have a high speed rail system in the united states but when there is already high speed rail system so you really get high speed rail system maglev hyperloop these are the options then those are the kind of options that countries will consider you already said for instance in europe they are not looking at maglev because the high speed railways have enough potential in fact the tgv that you are talking about they have reached speeds of about five seven that's right exactly so therefore that's not such an issue so no all the all the discussion we've had till now are really the hypothetical promise of the hyperloop the hype the hyped hyperloop promise shall we say whereas once you come down to practicalities there are going to be all kinds of issues that will come up for example okay now you've had a run with two human beings sitting inside over a half kilometer journey but if you have a 500 kilometer journey running at 1000 kilometers an hour we have no idea of the kind of safety issues that are going to come up therefore what kind of safety regulations are likely to be required therefore what kind of costs are likely to build in terms of the infrastructure etc these are complete unknowns right now completely unknown we don't know them at all we have no idea about performance of the hyperloop system of the pressure low pressure vacuum type maintenance maintaining that over a long period of time how that will work we don't know we know for example that when Elon Musk has been holding discussions across the US on the hyperloop he was reminded quite often that drones for example today the technology may be known but by the time the regulation to practical applications of drones in civilian utilization come about it has taken more than six years to even reach a stage where regulatory standards can be laid down safety standards can be laid down etc so the practical translation of the hyperloop is I think so far down the road that we are not even able to envisage how that works the same with autonomous vehicles on the roads except for trucks the passenger vehicle segments of autonomous vehicles we are still many years away from standardized regulatory systems and safety requirements let's talk about what the practicalities are likely to be let's talk about autonomous vehicles another day because that's really new kind of worms okay because you're talking about artificial intelligence driving vehicles so that that part has just been about for the time being but I just like to conclude that Elon Musk has been propagating this but he's not putting his money in this space xx or the electrical batteries electrical cars this is not where he's putting his money yes he's letting others put his money but he's a promoter he's using his success with electric cars electric batteries and of course overthrowing the bolivian government for lithium for all of that basically in fact he made that as his tweet live with it that you know we can overthrow governments okay on the question of bolivia so if we take all of that into account what we see is Elon Musk wants others to carry this baby this is not where he's putting his investment he's putting an investment in space xx and of course on the cars so this is really the high profile hype that he adds and Elon Musk after having made a success with cars electric cars and with the space xx is now saying this so the people put in this money and it could be argued that the main reason for the hyperloop hype that we've seen you see 100 mile per hour would not have created a hype except for the hyperloop hype already getting to be Elon Musk so that you can get capital into these companies what you really have is this kind of hype works for essentially raising capital on the money market and maybe this experiment therefore was rushed more with an eye for that than for really proving technology yeah except in this case of course you've got that other maverick he's not an inventor like Elon Musk is but he's a champion of a self-proclaimed champion of these frontier technologies virgin is competing with Elon Musk for space travel and Richard Branson would like to see himself as this tomorrow man and so Richard Branson has put some money into this and as you say that's right virgin hyperloop system and they're all eyeing a future prospect of this and are really targeting countries which have underdeveloped rail domestic rail systems and you will see one of the major pushes for this coming in the Middle East area where there is money available and there's a lack of an effective railway system and that's where they're trying to do it trying to tap into the aspirational oil money of the Middle East and combine it with the show of the high-tech promise that Branson brings to the table so we can expect to see maglev versus hyperloop go head to head on such fancy projects that's right focus projects in west Asia where they made money but looking at it at the moment it looks like it's the real target is not so much west Asia not so much railway systems but the share market and the capital markets could very easily raise money because that is going to determine the future of the hyperloop that unless there is money you need a couple of billion dollars to be able to bank role a functional system because right now apart from angel investors and a few multi-billionaires who are prepared to invest a few a couple of hundred million dollars you're not seeing money going beyond that and I frankly do not expect the share market to respond very well at this stage of development of the technology no that is why the hype rug is important yeah whether it's a Pfizer hype or it is a Remdesivir hype that we saw earlier all of those hypes I'm not saying the Remdesivir didn't pan out but the Pfizer vaccine may but a lot of it is targeted at the stock market because you can see the ones who start the companies or who are the basic the major stockholders start selling their shares and the share market goes up after such hype and we'll have to see and observe whether Branson puts in more money or sells his shares or recoups that money very quickly all I'm saying is that technology game is as much about hype and the share market sure is about technology sure not of course this is does not mean that the the hyperloop therefore is a failed technology it is not the question is the cost benefits we'll have to see what are the real costs that we'll have to see on the ground and whether the economies of that systems will make sense that has been the problem with Maglev systems as well why these are the high speed rail so all of these things are on the table but all of that Raghu today shared with us is that this experiment doesn't settle all those questions it's just that you see well the technology is feasible which we already knew we have put two people in the pod to show that yes human beings can be carried and that is something which we did not really need to do in order to prove this fact but on that note we'll let it go and we'll meet with Raghu again on such issues as well as following up the hyperloop system what happens to that hype and how it pans out thank you Raghu for being with us for our viewers do keep watching news click and do visit our website