So anyone who disagrees with you is invalid?


Yeah, I think I'm done here.

As dangerous as having 2 ton metallic vehicles traveling around at 60 MPH driven by humans who only by law need have at least 2 months of training? I guess.. Actually I already address the lift and fail safe issue, attach it to a ballon.. We're entering an age of automation, self driving cars, self delivering mail carriers, self guided drones, etc.. This isn't pie in sky, it's taking place now..

Personally I don't think the tubes idea will work for small parcel service since its not economical, but it might work as a human transport. Digger machines can create long large tunnels underneath cities cost effectively, put in a maglev rail, partially evacuate the tubes to reduce friction, push that train up to 600MPH and you might have something.. The price of building rail above ground maglev is about 100 million per mile, maybe underground is the way to go, no need to build around structures or noise issues.

-ddn

Personally I don't think the tubes idea will work for small parcel service since its not economical, but it might work as a human transport.

I'm not following your reasoning. It's not economical to transport goods, but it is economical to transport people through tubes? I mean if you can transport people one could assume the system could be used to transport objects as well. Unless you mean it would cost too much for each transport meaning for a person it would be like a taxi ride and more expensive?

Regarding being economical to transport goods the initial infrastructure cost and getting others to agree seems nearly impossible. I mean there's tons of cases of people trying to do it on the small scale in the 1800s but it never took off.

Also thinking about it since I brought up trucking and USPS it would be lobbied against since it makes human jobs obsolete. That part would kind of suck. It would be kind of anti-ludite of me to say that it doesn't matter though since it would be for the greater good.

So anyone who disagrees with you is invalid?

Was it something I said? I never said your point was invalid. I just disagreed with it.


You know something odd about all this. I'm talking about shipping and such, but I've personally sent 2 letters in my whole life and they were for school assignments. I was talking about this to my coworker and he was like "what about bills or did you just sign up for direct pay?" and I did. Other than receiving things from amazon once every few months I don't really use my mailbox (parent's) at all. I think that's what's keeping the whole system alive. That and spam mail.

Also cool video.
heh garbage vacuums.

stuff

I think you greatly underestimate the standardization of shipping that already exists. There's quite a bit of standardization already, and standardizing on such a micro scale will just limit the usability of the end product to be within shipping contraints, which many things already are even to fit inside large shipping containers let alone a tiny cylinder.

If you can get every cylinder to travel around at 60 miles per hour it will take longer for me to ship a letter to california than it does with the current system.

I think the fact that you have only used the postal service a handful of times in your lifetime puts you on sketchy ground with what is efficient for it.

It's also a pretty insane idea to try to make a huge investment in delivering small parcels when most of that is being replaced by paperless email.

The main benefits would be to lower the labor cost and create a system that requires very little human involvement except for maintenance and upgrades. Ideally it's a system that runs 100% independent of human interaction for sending packages in an almost identical model as the Internet.

It's clear you have no idea what the costs for your magic tube infrastructure is. There is a reason we don't have a fiber internet access to every home in this country, and your proposal is far, far more expensive (and complicated) than a fiber line.

You really think this concept which has been implemented a hundred years ago is as unfeasible as his post?[/quote]

Sending a tube from inside the bank to the car port? Obviously not.. On a nation wide scale? Absolutely.

Also in the future if you can't refute ideas don't resort to pointless troll threads. They don't work in a real debate.[/quote]
Your points have been refuted. This idea won't work and you're stubbornly sticking to it with no evidence to support your claim. If anything you're the troll here.

Yeah, I don't think automated mail delivery vehicles are feasible.[/quote]

You sir are a ignorant fool.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driverless_car#History

Driverless cars are a real possibility and best of all they leverage the already existing infrastructure which already allows packages to be delivered across the country and to individual homes.

I can't tell if you're trolling me since you have nothing valid to say.[/quote]
You're the one who keeps repeating the same bullshit in the face of criticism from multiple people. It's clear you're either not interested in or not capable of intelligent conversation, but clearly I'm the troll here.

You know, I had the same thought. It's kind of fanciful and I doubt it'd ever happen, but I like it anyway.

There would be some obstacles. For starters, TCP will not work out-of-the-box; you can't just drop packets and retransmit. You'd need an electronic network to go along with it to negotiate things.

Second, you probably want an air/fluid return path to go with each pipe (perhaps integrated into it, in a concentric fashion), so that you can suck air out at one end as you push it in the other.

Third, if these packages move quickly -- which they should -- then energy reclamation will be important, perhaps by using kinetic energy of the capsules to recompress air (and simultaneously brake the capsule).

I also think various electrical alternatives should be investigated; these may be slightly more complicated, but they may offer greater efficiency in return (and mass-production can bring the costs of components down). The rapid compression or expansion of gas tends not to be a reversible process (i.e., it wastes a lot of energy).

Personally I don't think the tubes idea will work for small parcel service since its not economical, but it might work as a human transport. Digger machines can create long large tunnels underneath cities cost effectively, put in a maglev rail, partially evacuate the tubes to reduce friction, push that train up to 600MPH and you might have something.. The price of building rail above ground maglev is about 100 million per mile, maybe underground is the way to go, no need to build around structures or noise issues.

He's talking about pneumatically powered delivery which is ridiculous on the scale he's referring to. vactrains are a much more viable option for cross country travel.

I think you greatly underestimate the standardization of shipping that already exists. There's quite a bit of standardization already, and standardizing on such a micro scale will just limit the usability of the end product to be within shipping contraints, which many things already are even to fit inside large shipping containers let alone a tiny cylinder.

I'm not saying the current system isn't standardized so much as saying the current standard way of doing things isn't as efficient as it could be. I'm talking about day to day cost wise.

If you can get every cylinder to travel around at 60 miles per hour it will take longer for me to ship a letter to california than it does with the current system.

Looking online the average time for people shipping from New York to California takes 4 days. 2905 miles at 60 mph takes 49 hours so basically 2 days exactly pretty much. Assuming no fast track networks for mail. (Think of a tube system with privately owned networks that allow you to send a piece of mail across the US at say 100 mph). To get there in 4 days would take an average speed of 30 mph in the routing system assuming it can route in a general straight line which isn't realistic unless it was designed for that kind of traffic.

Do you live in Europe? Placing capsules onto a plane automagically is another option since it's unrealistic to run the tubes under the ocean and maintain them.

Do you live in Europe? Placing capsules onto a plane automagically is another option since it's unrealistic to run the tubes under the ocean and maintain them.

You're just full of these gems. Spanning oceans with your magic pipes is far, far easier than connecting every city in a nation. We already have plenty of cables across the ocean and this has been done for over a hundred years.

http://en.wikipedia....nications_cable

[quote name='Sirisian' timestamp='1315519060' post='4859239']You really think this concept which has been implemented a hundred years ago is as unfeasible as his post?

Sending a tube from inside the bank to the car port? Obviously not.. On a nation wide scale? Absolutely.
[/quote]
I don't get where you find that the system can't scale. I've already conceded it has infrastructure costs and concerns. There's nothing to say you can't send capsules through a tube for over a mile.

[quote name='Sirisian' timestamp='1315519060' post='4859239']Yeah, I don't think automated mail delivery vehicles are feasible.

[more ad hominem attacks]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driverless_car#History

Driverless cars are a real possibility and best of all they leverage the already existing infrastructure which already allows packages to be delivered across the country and to individual homes.
[/quote]
That technology still has a very long way to go before it's proven itself safe and reliable. (If it ever does). Don't get caught up in the hype some companies create. I'm describing a system that could be implemented now with known pneumatic tube technology. (Yes there are companies that specialize in that).

[quote name='Sirisian' timestamp='1315532225' post='4859316']
Do you live in Europe? Placing capsules onto a plane automagically is another option since it's unrealistic to run the tubes under the ocean and maintain them.

You're just full of these gems. Spanning oceans with your magic pipes is far, far easier than connecting every city in a nation. We already have plenty of cables across the ocean and this has been done for over a hundred years.

http://en.wikipedia....nications_cable
[/quote]
Big difference between pipes sending fiber and tubes sending items. I mean thing about the pressure required to send things that far. The repeater systems alone would be insane. That's why I mentioned the maintenance cost. You'll notice I'm being realistic about the system's limitations. You might do like-wise.

There is a reason we don't have a fiber internet access to every home in this country

It's not the reason you're thinking. We'd be de-railing the thread if we went into why ISPs didn't run fiber to everyone's house for the good of everyone. It's not because of density.