• Home
  • News
  • Fortune 500
  • Tech
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Lifestyle
  • Rankings
  • Multimedia
Commentary

Why Elon Musk’s Hyperloop Is Mostly Hype

By
Leon Vanstone
Leon Vanstone
and
Bethany Cianciolo
Bethany Cianciolo
Down Arrow Button Icon
By
Leon Vanstone
Leon Vanstone
and
Bethany Cianciolo
Bethany Cianciolo
Down Arrow Button Icon
July 31, 2017, 4:18 PM ET

Would you like to ride to work in a jet-powered roller-coaster gun? Elon Musk thinks you would.

Musk, of SpaceX and Tesla (TSLA) fame, recently tweeted that he had received “verbal” approval from the U.S. government to build a “Hyperloop,” a train system that would enable travel between Washington, D.C. and New York in just 29 minutes, some time in the near future.

This is, without a doubt, an extremely ambitious project. Is Musk promising more than he can deliver?

A Hyperloop is essentially a jet-powered, high-speed train that travels close to 800 mph through a tube and is accelerated by magnets. The idea is certainly very futuristic, but hardly new, as Hyperloop is a type of vac-train. First proposed as early as 1799, vac-trains are trains that travel through a tube that has little air inside and can travel as fast as thousands of miles an hour. Why? No air means very little friction. It’s why spaceships travel so fast in space—with no air, there is little to slow them down.

But having a total vacuum in a pipe is hard. Pipes are leaky—just think how much your faucet drips. Hyperloop gets around this major issue by only having a partial vacuum in the tubes (meaning they can leak a little). With a partial vacuum, some air will begin to build up in front of the train as it travels, which would normally slow it down. But Hyperloop uses a jet engine inside the train to suck what little air builds up in front of the train out of the back, allowing the train to move with hardly any friction. This is what makes Hyperloop different from most vac-train concepts.

In this sense, the Hyperloop is not a breakthrough of science, but of engineering—using existing technology in a novel way. Indeed, recent proof-of-concept tests seem to indicate that the Hyperloop team is making progress toward a working demonstrator.

True to form, Musk has given few details on exactly how this new Hyperloop route might look. At face value, it appears Musk wants to build a (mostly?) underground Hyperloop route between New York and D.C., which are about 200 miles apart. But constructing a 200-mile tunnel is no small feat. Currently, the longest railway tunnels are all under 50 miles long.

To build this mammoth tunnel, Musk will use another fresh venture of his: The Boring Company, which specializes in underground tunneling. The Boring Company will also use novel engineering to tunnel faster, cheaper, and better than anyone else; a feat which seems reasonable to achieve when you have billions of dollars and excellent engineers at your disposal—which, realistically, solves most engineering problems.

But is it even possible to build a Hyperloop train that moves people quickly between New York and D.C.?

Probably. The technology is there; they just need to engineer it.

Is it possible to build a Hyperloop train into a 200-mile underground tunnel on a reasonable timeline that moves people in 29 minutes and isn’t prohibitively expensive?

Probably not. Musk would need to quickly and concurrently mature two, completely undeveloped ideas in parallel. There’s only so much that can be achieved, even with endless money and engineers. And let us not forget that Musk has failed to deliver on big promises before: the Falcon Heavy is years behind schedule.

But perhaps before we ask can we build the Hyperloop, we should be more concerned with whether we should. The cost of this Hyperloop project is likely to be astronomically high. A different Hyperloop route between Los Angeles and San Francisco is conservatively forecast around $6 billion and doesn’t require a 200-mile long tunnel be drilled.

Consider this: There are about 140 round-trip New York-D.C. and D.C.-New York flights each day with 100 passengers (max) on each 90-minute flight, and there are 120 New York-D.C. and D.C.-New York Amtrak trains with about 300 passengers on each three-hour train ride.

A 29-minute New York-D.C. Hyperloop could save, at most, a combined time of about 6 million minutes (12 years) across all commuters each day. But, imagine you could build a better public transit system inside New York that saves every metro passenger 10 minutes every trip. There are nearly 9 million passengers that use public transportation in New York each day, so you would save a massive 88 million minutes (167 years) across all commuters each day.

In my mind, Musk’s idea has two components: building tunnels quickly and cheaply (The Boring Company), and a futuristic high-speed train (Hyperloop). The Boring Company is, unironically, the most interesting part of this idea. The Boring Company could facilitate a whole new subterranean transport network within a city. Available to all, it might allow entire populations to move through a city faster. Conversely, the Hyperloop is a bit like a rocket: very expensive, and moves few people very quickly to places most people don’t need to be.

Currently, most cities don’t even have a modern public transport system that is fit for purpose. The Boring Company could potentially change that by making tunneling quicker and cheaper. Why then, should we pay to dig large and expensive tunnels between cities when we could build smaller systems inside a city that serve more people? Even as a rocket scientist, I realize that we often need more roads, schools, and hospitals than extra rockets. But if we’re going to spend billions of dollars improving transport, do we really need a jet-powered, roller-coaster gun? Perhaps we should be focusing on something a little more boring.

Leon Vanstone is a rocket scientist and aerodynamic engineer.

About the Authors
By Leon Vanstone
See full bioRight Arrow Button Icon
By Bethany Cianciolo
See full bioRight Arrow Button Icon

Latest in Commentary

Alex Amouyel is the President and CEO of Newman’s Own Foundation
Commentaryphilanthropy
Following in Paul Newman and Yvon Chouinard’s footsteps: There are more ways for leaders to give it away in ‘the Great Boomer Fire Sale’ than ever
By Alex AmouyelDecember 7, 2025
17 hours ago
Amit Walia
CommentaryM&A
Why the timing was right for Salesforce’s $8 billion acquisition of Informatica — and for the opportunities ahead
By Amit WaliaDecember 6, 2025
2 days ago
Steve Milton is the CEO of Chain, a culinary-led pop-culture experience company founded by B.J. Novak and backed by Studio Ramsay Global.
CommentaryFood and drink
Affordability isn’t enough. Fast-casual restaurants need a fandom-first approach
By Steve MiltonDecember 5, 2025
3 days ago
Paul Atkins
CommentaryCorporate Governance
Turning public companies into private companies: the SEC’s retreat from transparency and accountability
By Andrew BeharDecember 5, 2025
3 days ago
Matt Rogers
CommentaryInfrastructure
I built the first iPhone with Steve Jobs. The AI industry is at risk of repeating an early smartphone mistake
By Matt RogersDecember 4, 2025
4 days ago
Jerome Powell
CommentaryFederal Reserve
Fed officials like the mystique of being seen as financial technocrats, but it’s time to demystify the central bank
By Alexander William SalterDecember 4, 2025
4 days ago

Most Popular

placeholder alt text
Real Estate
The 'Great Housing Reset' is coming: Income growth will outpace home-price growth in 2026, Redfin forecasts
By Nino PaoliDecember 6, 2025
2 days ago
placeholder alt text
AI
Nvidia CEO says data centers take about 3 years to construct in the U.S., while in China 'they can build a hospital in a weekend'
By Nino PaoliDecember 6, 2025
2 days ago
placeholder alt text
Economy
The most likely solution to the U.S. debt crisis is severe austerity triggered by a fiscal calamity, former White House economic adviser says
By Jason MaDecember 6, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
Economy
JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon says Europe has a 'real problem’
By Katherine Chiglinsky and BloombergDecember 6, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
Big Tech
Mark Zuckerberg rebranded Facebook for the metaverse. Four years and $70 billion in losses later, he’s moving on
By Eva RoytburgDecember 5, 2025
3 days ago
placeholder alt text
Uncategorized
Transforming customer support through intelligent AI operations
By Lauren ChomiukNovember 26, 2025
11 days ago
Rankings
  • 100 Best Companies
  • Fortune 500
  • Global 500
  • Fortune 500 Europe
  • Most Powerful Women
  • Future 50
  • World’s Most Admired Companies
  • See All Rankings
Sections
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Success
  • Tech
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Environment
  • Fortune Crypto
  • Health
  • Retail
  • Lifestyle
  • Politics
  • Newsletters
  • Magazine
  • Features
  • Commentary
  • Mpw
  • CEO Initiative
  • Conferences
  • Personal Finance
  • Education
Customer Support
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Customer Service Portal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms Of Use
  • Single Issues For Purchase
  • International Print
Commercial Services
  • Advertising
  • Fortune Brand Studio
  • Fortune Analytics
  • Fortune Conferences
  • Business Development
About Us
  • About Us
  • Editorial Calendar
  • Press Center
  • Work At Fortune
  • Diversity And Inclusion
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map

© 2025 Fortune Media IP Limited. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy | CA Notice at Collection and Privacy Notice | Do Not Sell/Share My Personal Information
FORTUNE is a trademark of Fortune Media IP Limited, registered in the U.S. and other countries. FORTUNE may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.