Progress to Vegas City Wide Loop Tunnel System

Special use permit applications and Design Review applications have been started for the Boring Company Las Vegas Loop system.

The Boring Company Vegas Loop will be underground tunnels stretching as far north as downtown Las Vegas, throughout the Strip corridor, and as far south as the Allegiant Stadium, pending approval later this week by the Stadium Authority, the owner of the stadium. Passengers will be whisked through tunnels in all-electric Tesla vehicles.

The $52 million Convention Center Loop should be completed this January. It will connect the existing 3.2 million square foot Las Vegas Convention Center to its $980 million West Hall expansion. There is also an approved expansion to the nearest casinos.

The permits should be granted early in 2021 and the section from the convention center to the strip could open as early as 2023.

This transportation system of the future could become another attraction for tourists.

 



SOURCES- Boring Company, LVCVA
Written By Brian Wang, Nextbigfuture.com

16 thoughts on “Progress to Vegas City Wide Loop Tunnel System”

  1. It's still super fast considering how slow infrastructure projects usually are. And it will go even faster if Prufrock works out. Still it would be unwise for The Boring Company to promise anything faster until they've proven they can actually improve TBMs. But if Prufrock really is successful, progress will likely accelerate a lot.

    Reply
  2. But Tesla in 2005/2006 did not have Elon Musk of 2020. The Elon Musk of 2020 can get a billion dollars credit in the blink of an eye. And still we are talking about a project that manages making a few miles of small diameter tunnels in 6 years ("..could open as early as 2023…"). That's it…

    Reply
  3. Nonsense. It was only founded 3 years ago. Compare Boring Company to SpaceX and Tesla in 2005/2006 and it looks pretty good. The main question for TBC is obviously how much progress they've made with their prototype TBM "Prufrock" which is not publicly available information. Their goal is to tunnel 15 times faster with Prufrock, which would be huge if they can achieve that.

    Reply
  4. I'm assuming the cars will be under the full control of a central computer and as soon as one car senses a problem, it will be relayed to the computer which will tell all cars to hit the breaks simultaneously.

    Reply
  5. Instead of putting words in WHO's mouth, why not use their estimate of IFR?

    If we missed 99% of cases (as you claim), is it possible we missed some of the deaths, too? I find the claim dubious. Population anti-body testing doesn't support that level of prevalence.

    Reply
  6. I think in practice, driving at 250 kph is a pipedream, and makes the concept a lot more dangerous and difficult to execute than it needs to be. Even being able to travel at 120 kph with no traffic is pretty disruptive in many cities where cars average 20-30 kph.

    Reply
  7. It would be great if they could scale the tunneling business. Unlike Tesla and SpaceX, the "Booring company" seems to scale rather linearly and rather slowly. Disappointing….

    Reply
  8. dispute what you're saying.

    WHO, by their own admission, have said that around 10% of the world's population have been infected. That's 750 million people. With deaths at 1 million this means an IFR of 0.13%, essentially in-line with the flu.

    Reply
  9. I think some of the commenters here have an incorrect idea about the system mentioned in this article. The commenters seem to be assuming that the users of this system will drive their own cars into the tunnels. As I understand the system, it is like a bus or subway system — it is for moving individual people, not individuals' cars.

    So all the comments that revolve around how to get cars into and out of the tunnels, connecting to parking garages, etc. are way off the mark. I imagine people will enter and exit the system via elevators or escalators. The vehicles that run in the tunnels will be provided as part of the system. I don't know how the vehicles will be controlled, but I am confident that the designers have taken into account the need for those vehicles to react safely in the event of any kind of accident.

    Reply
  10. Deadly indeed. My niece graduated from college this past May, no ceremony of course. An adjunct professor at the university, one of her teachers, managed to get grades in while not quite feeling right. He was dead less than two weeks later. An early victim. He was kind of old, in his 60s.

    Reply
  11. Sounds great, until one small part malfunctions and you wind up with a tunnel-jamming 60 car pileup. Autopilot's never going to change the physics of braking distance.

    Reply
  12. I think if you did the ramps, you wouldn't need the side lane for slower traffic. Everyone could be up to max speed by the time they're done descending the ramp.

    Have ramps branch off to/from freeways? With a waiting station and a little arm that bars the way until your autopilot is engaged? That way you can integrate it straight into the current traffic flow system without overwhelming some poor surface street during rush hour.

    Although I don't really see why it needs to be underground at all. It's great if you want to deposit people directly to parking garages, but that requires an improbable number of participating parking garages to make a dent in a city like LA. But if the point is more 'robot car go faster when no share tunnel with dumb car' then you can just set up some barriers and convert the carpool lane into the robot lane. Let em' floor the accelerator on the regular freeways.

    Reply
  13. Give it another6-8 months, COVID-19 has been known for 10 months. That is nothing. Give 2ish years and we can do something. No magic cure as one group would have you believe. It has a certain profile for who it causes significant harm. though it could impact anyone. Think of it as the flu but 4-5x as potent in terms of lethality. Anyone claiming otherwise is speculating several orders of magnitude over the actual data. They are drawing on extreme assumptions to justify an opinion.

    Reply

Leave a Comment