Burly

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,200
We've ran the numbers and we found that the most cost effective solution is to pay people to not go to a Dodgers game.
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
20,285
Los Angeles has had subways since 1993.

While I'm all for increasing transit to stuff like sports stadiums, and even more in support of private companies funding it since when the main goal of a transit project is to essentially bolster a private entity, I'm not a fan of spending public money on it. (Though Dodger Stadium's location is kind of smackdab in the middle of a residential area that I'm sort of okay with public money being used to try and address the traffic it generates). This doesn't seem like a super well thought out plan. Besides the number of people it can transport, having it appointment only sounds like a nightmare. Plus its only connection being to the Red Line along Vermont avenue seems particularly shortsighted as it essentially cuts out helping fans coming from the Gateway Cities, East LA, and the San Gabriel Valley which is a pretty significant amount of people. If he were to actually go through with the plan (which I have doubts) it really should extend the tunnel to the Gold Line a little further east.

But an ideal solution would actually just extend the currently planned West Santa Ana line from its planned terminus in DTLA up to Glendale while having stops in Silver Lake, Echo Park, and near Dodger Stadium.

Are you saying you don't like public money being spent on transportation projects, or you don't like private companies using public funds to build transit?
 

snapcracken

Member
Oct 25, 2017
619
Was only ever tested in atmosphere, never went to space and was ultimately scrapped for being impractical, expensive, unscalable, incapable of actually reaching orbit and repeated failures.

The project was a good test in automated landing, but did not contain the whole package.

Maybe given more years the project could have been something, but the fact is it was cancelled early on for not serving the purpose set out for it.

Its successor project at lockheed Martin failed for similar reasons and ultimately was cancelled after too many failures had been sustained with mounting costs.

But the fact that that early on they were able to make major strides should've made it obvious that it was possible, it just needed better tech and more effort.

So it isn't really SpaceX did something that was *impossible*, they just were the ones who had the time and money after the tech had matured. It's not like without SpaceX that innovation wouldn't have happened--someone would've eventually done it. SpaceX just happened to try to do it before them.
 

libregkd

Member
Oct 25, 2017
262
Are you saying you don't like public money being spent on transportation projects, or you don't like private companies using public funds to build transit?
I'm a huge proponent of public transit and spending money to make those projects happen. I just think when you are talking about a transit project whose primary goal would be a huge boon to a private entity (like non-stop trip to Dodger Stadium), that private entity should put up some funds to make it happen as well. The public shouldn't be the only one to put up the money to make something happen while the Dodgers owner gets to reap the benefits of it. The same goes for a proposed aerial tram in Inglewood that would connect the region's Metro rail line to the new football stadium. The Rams/Chargers owners should at least put up some capital for that as they'll be the primary benefactors of that project.

This is particularly true of sports venues as any stations near those will only be active so long as a season is on-going (save for random events that get booked here and there) and would be pretty desolate for a good chunk of the year. It's why I suggest just extending a planned line as there would be a lot of use of a line that connects Glendale and Los Angeles; a stop near Dodger Stadium just happens to be along that route.
 
Oct 25, 2017
20,285
I'm a huge proponent of public transit and spending money to make those projects happen. I just think when you are talking about a transit project whose primary goal would be a huge boon to a private entity (like non-stop trip to Dodger Stadium), that private entity should put up some funds to make it happen as well. The public shouldn't be the only one to put up the money to make something happen while the Dodgers owner gets to reap the benefits of it. The same goes for a proposed aerial tram in Inglewood that would connect the region's Metro rail line to the new football stadium. The Rams/Chargers owners should at least put up some capital for that as they'll be the primary benefactors of that project.

This is particularly true of sports venues as any stations near those will only be active so long as a season is on-going (save for random events that get booked here and there) and would be pretty desolate for a good chunk of the year. It's why I suggest just extending a planned line as there would be a lot of use of a line that connects Glendale and Los Angeles; a stop near Dodger Stadium just happens to be along that route.

Ahh ok, I get what you're saying now. It basically boils down to the same problem we all have with stadium funding.
 
OP
OP
American Eskimo
Jan 18, 2018
2,625
But the fact that that early on they were able to make major strides should've made it obvious that it was possible, it just needed better tech and more effort.

So it isn't really SpaceX did something that was *impossible*, they just were the ones who had the time and money after the tech had matured. It's not like without SpaceX that innovation wouldn't have happened--someone would've eventually done it. SpaceX just happened to try to do it before them.

Correct.

"Everybody said it was impossible" is complete bullshit considering multiple companies were trying it.

23 years later, SpaceX managed it. No shit. Look how much tech moves in 20 years,

The 1993 model was probably running on a highly classified state of the art PlayStation2 prototype.
 

VectorPrime

Banned
Apr 4, 2018
11,781
I fee like we're just days away from Musk going on an acid fueled rant and announcing that he'll fund that Last Jedi redo project.
 

Dingens

Circumventing ban with an alt account
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
2,018
[...]
Exactly. Libertarian morons are constantly coming up with harebrained schemes like this with the premise of undermining anything remotely public, and they're always worse than the original concept. It's the modern version of how GM bought up local rail systems throughout the U.S. and simply dismantled them.

There was one in The Atlantic that was about building an underground passage just for rideshare type vehicles that would all have varying levels of service and it's like... how about a fucking train? You could just put a train down there and move far more people. Like we already do. Jesus christ.

Uber worked because of the app, and because it is run at a massive loss to drive out competition. It is a disaster worse than what we had, for society at large.

And let's not forget how he's saving the planet be relocating all the rich people to Mars! The first step to fight overpopulation. What a hero


[....] I think the bigger issue is building a subway in an earthquake infested area to begin with. But I'm no expert, so who knows...

like in Tokyo...?


[....] Seriously, how many topics about this guy do we need?

I don't know, how much attention does he want?
 

killerrin

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,296
Toronto
Correct.

"Everybody said it was impossible" is complete bullshit considering multiple companies were trying it.

23 years later, SpaceX managed it. No shit. Look how much tech moves in 20 years,

The 1993 model was probably running on a highly classified state of the art PlayStation2 prototype.

Multiple companies were trying it. They all failed. Every prototype before Space X did it failed. It's why after the big failure of the successor program to the video you linked, most companies stoped trying to do it, favouring other cost saving research and alternative reusable components.

At that point in time, the concept was for all intents and purposes "impossible". Mainly due to the amount of money that would have been needed to throw at the program until they got it working. Money that for the other companies was better spent optimizing other parts of their businesses.

Come in SpaceX who dedicated entirely towards the concept of reusable rockets, to the point they almost went bankrupt. Got it working, got it to orbit, started using it for actual payloads and then perfected it on the final mile.

Basically you can have all the research in the world, but without money and a willingness to put it I to practice and take things Into the most expensive step of the medium-final miles, it might as well remain impossible.

So all in all, the Engineers behind SpaceX worked wonders and managed to do what everybody else failed at achieving. You are not allowed to underplay them and undervalue their work just because you don't like Musk.

Granted, maybe I should have used "Impractical" vs "impossible". But that is an English choice, colloquially they are swapped out in this field of science and technology. And it doesn't undermine my entire point.
 

CrunchyFrog

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,501
This is not even proof of concept, more like crude public prototype. Except as OP points out this makes zero fiscal/practical sense, which runs antithetical to the basis for this venture. It certainly smells of distraction and lack of judgment.
 

Psamtik

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,002
Elon Musk's creative process:

aJAJhEU.jpg
 

PanickyFool

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,947
Exactly. Libertarian morons are constantly coming up with harebrained schemes like this with the premise of undermining anything remotely public, and they're always worse than the original concept. It's the modern version of how GM bought up local rail systems throughout the U.S. and simply dismantled them.
Any day of the week and without question I would trade American style public transit, Intercity rail, and airports for the privatized operations of East Asia, Western Europe, and southern Florida.

I mean the pieces of American transportation infrastructure that do not suck are:
-private rail freight (best in world)
-air travel

I think the bigger issue is building a subway in an earthquake infested area to begin with. But I'm no expert, so who knows...

The best subway systems in the world are on the ring of fire.
 

whytemyke

The Fallen
Oct 28, 2017
3,799
Well... no they can't, because it's a one way tunnel. (well, yes they could send them back in-between sending people over, but then you half the rate of person you can carry per hour)

Seriously, this thing doesn't make any sense.
(watch them adding a second tunnel so that it become two ways. Congratulation, you just "invented" the metro; you're justy a bit over a century late)
Yeah I mean if it's only a 4 minute trip it's not impossible. I don't consider it efficient but I mean... Oh well lol. I don't even know.


Los Angeles has had subways since 1993..

...and today I learned that not only does LA have subways (Which I should know already since I have watched a movie and seen it but oh well) but also that Tokyo gets Earthquakes. (I know Tokyo has subways... That's where you level up by reading books when you find a seat.)

So I will go take my foot out of my mouth. I think you guys have this thread covered as far as insight goes lol.
 

HStallion

Member
Oct 25, 2017
63,155
Yeah I mean if it's only a 4 minute trip it's not impossible. I don't consider it efficient but I mean... Oh well lol. I don't even know.






...and today I learned that not only does LA have subways (Which I should know already since I have watched a movie and seen it but oh well) but also that Tokyo gets Earthquakes. (I know Tokyo has subways... That's where you level up by reading books when you find a seat.)

So I will go take my foot out of my mouth. I think you guys have this thread covered as far as insight goes lol.

You didn't know Tokyo gets earthquakes? The entire planet gets Earthquakes...
 

Dingens

Circumventing ban with an alt account
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
2,018
oh... so that's why our very own board shills have been absent lately. Gotta play the crowd at Musks little charade
 

Dyle

One Winged Slayer
The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
30,413
That kid's nephew looks like a great kid, rocking that Pikachu jacket looking hella fresh.

I'm just going to quote my earlier post in this thread, because what else can you say at this point

I swear every time we hear more about these "mass" transit plans they get worse and worse.
 

Slayven

Never read a comic in his life
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
94,476
That tweet thread is amazing. They didn't ask anybody from the neighborhoods where the thing will be
 

rockinreelin

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,163
Yeah I mean if it's only a 4 minute trip it's not impossible. I don't consider it efficient but I mean... Oh well lol. I don't even know.

...and today I learned that not only does LA have subways (Which I should know already since I have watched a movie and seen it but oh well) but also that Tokyo gets Earthquakes. (I know Tokyo has subways... That's where you level up by reading books when you find a seat.)

So I will go take my foot out of my mouth. I think you guys have this thread covered as far as insight goes lol.





LA has had a subways since the 1920's actually. We had the pacific electric system that went all over LA county and had subway stops and tunnels. The trains ceased full operation sometime in the late 50's.