Skip to main content

HTT and Slovakian government are exploring a Hyperloop route between Budapest, Vienna and Bratislava

HTT pod

Hyperloop Transportation Technologies (HTT), not to be confused with Hyperloop Technologies (HT), announced today that the company has reached an agreement with the Slovakian government to explore potential routes for a hyperloop which could connect to Austria and Hungary.

HTT’s hyperloop concept is based on Elon Musk’s idea to create a new mode of transport in a reduced-pressure environment, taking the form of a tube, in which it will be easier to transport people or cargo in “pods” at high-speed and efficiency. In HTT’s case, it could as fast as 760 mph. 

According to HTT (via CrowdfundingInsider), Bratislava-to-Vienna route is estimated to take 8 minutes at Hyperloop’s full speed, while a Bratislava-to-Budapest trip just 10 minutes.

The startup is also considering a route between Bratislava and Košice—a distance of 400 kilometers (250 miles), which would now take only about 25 minutes instead of the 4.5 hours it currently takes by car.

Vazil Hudak, Minister of Economy of the Slovak Republic, commented on the agreement;

“Hyperloop in Europe would cut distances substantially and network cities in unprecedented ways. A transportation system of this kind would redefine the concept of commuting and boost cross-border cooperation in Europe,” said Hudak. “The expansion of Hyperloop will lead to an increased demand for the creation of new innovation hubs, in Slovakia and all over Europe.”

Here’s the current recommended car route from Budapest to Vienna, while stopping by Bratislava:HTT slovakia

HTT is developing this possible first full-scale hyperloop route alongside its Quay Valley project in California in a new city midway between Los Angeles and San Francisco, where it plans to build a 5-mile long track as a proof-of-concept.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

You’re reading Electrek— experts who break news about Tesla, electric vehicles, and green energy, day after day. Be sure to check out our homepage for all the latest news, and follow Electrek on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to stay in the loop. Don’t know where to start? Check out our YouTube channel for the latest reviews.


  1. Bryce - 7 years ago

    It kinda looks like a flying tampon…. just saying…

  2. R3D - 7 years ago

    While I’m with this new cheaper and more eco-friendly alternative transportation technology, but I have two major concerns about it, and both have the same root: terrorism. While airplanes can be “easily” protected against terrorists, this is completely unprotected. In case of air transportation we only have to catch the ‘Allah akbars’ on the airport. After take off, there’s no significant threat if they can’t get on the plane. While this technology is based on hundreds (or even thousands) of miles long unprotected tubes on the ground, which is easily accessible for anyone.

    The second thing:
    If this technology was spread out that means the airlines can pull down the shades and close the shop. I wouldn’t cry but in this situation if the previously mentioned “goat lovers” would do a few coordinated attacks against the tube system of the Hyperloop, they could easily block the transportation of an entire continent (or in between continents) for weeks or even months. They don’t even need to target humans just blow up the tubes.

    I don’t know… I might have not thought about this a few years earlier, but – being European – the recent events in Europe have changed my point of view.

    • Stephen Davies - 7 years ago

      There are already FOUR ways to travel between Budapest and Vienna. These are
      1) Conventional Train
      2) Road – Car and Coach
      3) Air
      4) By Hydrofoil along the Danube

      Adding a new one just for passengers will indeed be a terrorist target but to say that shutting down this and other routes like it would bring the continent of Europe to a standstill is totally ridiculous. It can’t happen. Sorry.
      There are already plenty of ‘soft’ targets for the terrorists to attack without going anywhere near this sort of thing.
      Besides, if it was ever built, it would be well into the next decade before it came into service. The world may well be a very different place by then.
      If no one ever took risks we would not have the world as we know it today. A project like this is a risk. It might not work.
      If you don’t like it then you don’t have to travel on it you know. You could drive.

      Life is a risk. do you never leave your home then? How many people die from accidents at home?

    • Anon - 7 years ago

      Terrorist have lots of ways to scare a lot of people today, so it’s not getting a lot worse if the hyperloop exists. Instead of destroying the hyperloop, why not just destroy a train bridge and watch a train with 100s of people in it try to use the bridge? The right way to fight terrorism is to
      a) make sure that as many people as possible can live a happy life so they have no actual reason to be mad at others
      b) for the irrational, crazy, psychopathic remaining terrorists: put them in jail.

      Looks like most terrorists are busy fighting for ISIS right now. And some more (Nazi terrorists) are busy because they set refugee places on fire on a weekly basis in Germany. So yeah… I’m not afraid of taking a train, I’m not afraid of going by plane, and I won’t be afraid of using the hyperloop (if it turns out to be safe and not crash all the time). Heck, I even take my car sometimes, which is arguably one of the most dangerous and deadly activities nowadays. 🙂

  3. Dmytro - 7 years ago

    Please make one Vienna – Split. There is also a lot of space there and millions of passengers each year (5 hrs in a row).

  4. Paul Van Obberghen - 7 years ago

    As I already said. Even if it was really possible to build such a mean of transportation at reasonnable costs, who would want to travel at very high speed in a completely enclosed missile in a vaccuum tube?
    I believe though, that the cost for building such a system, most likely numerous times the cost for building a conventional High Speed Train, will be the end of the dream. A conventional High Speed Train having the advantage of being able to use conventional tracks and railway stations at both end of the trip, maybe some inbetween, which spares alot of money. While this thing needs completely dedicated infrastructures from end to end. That is getting this tube in an out of large city centers.
    Another concern is energy consumption, per passenger. I wonder how it compares with an High Speed Train carrying several hundreds of passengers at a time, even if it is “only” at half the speed. Yet, if it is better energy efficient, the first and second point will probably remain quite a problem.
    Eventually, the Thalys HST trip between Brussels and Paris (325Km) is 1h35, city center to city center, including a stop at Lille underway. Isn’t that fast enough already? It certainly beats the plane.
    Ok, granted, HST is last century technology. But it’s fast, safe, proven, and getting better all the time. So?

    • Vinzent - 7 years ago

      The same ones who today travel in completely enclosed aluminum tubes moving at 10km height with -50 degrees outside and no breathable air?

      • Paul Van Obberghen - 7 years ago

        These aluminum/composite tubes that are airplanes have windows and that makes all the difference. As I said earlier, airliner manufacturers are resisting the engineers who keep begging them to be able to remove these holes in their pressurized fuselage. And these manufacturers keep wanting them bigger and bigger. That’s because even if you don’t see much most of the time, and sits far from a window, this helps one’s natural claustrophobia, which everyone has to some degrees. And TV screens reproducing the view outside wont do it as your brain knows it’s not a window. This tubes are going to be fully blind as it seems. I’m just a little bit claustrophobic, and I’m never comfortable in a plane with windows. I would never board a plane without actual windows. I don’t think I’m such an exception.

    • Anon - 7 years ago

      As Vinzent said, I’d take the tubes (underground, very high up in the air, or maybe soon in a vacuum tube) any day!

      High speed trains are nice, of course. But why stay at 1h35 for 325km, when you could have 0h40 using the hyperloop? Using the same mindset, we’d still have horses as the main means of transport today, because I can get from my place to the next place in a reasonable time on a horse. And who wants to go from Munich to Berlin in just a few hours anyway, 1 week of horse travel time for that trip should be okay for anybody.

      Maybe in 50 years I can live in Munich and work in Stuttgart, and travel time is just 20 minutes — just like I can live in Olching today and work in Munich. Why shouldn’t we try to achieve that?

      Even better, we’d need less planes or maybe no planes at all (submarine hyperloop? 😉 ). Planes are climate killers. So it’s not just about travelling faster, it’s also about travelling at/above plane speed, while hopefully using only renewable energy sources at the same time.

      • Paul Van Obberghen - 7 years ago

        Your comparison between the HST and a horse is a bit ludicrous. You compare a trip that would take 1/3rd of the time to a trip that would take dozens of times more; this makes little sense.

        Don’t get me wrong, I’m a technology fan, and I think this is a great technology for the future. So, if this is actually as efficient (per passenger) than an HST AND costs about the same to build and operate, then I’ll say why not? Even if this cost more and is less efficient, but people prepared to cover the cost of getting there in a hurry, I’ll keep saying, why not? Yet, this doesn’t solve the claustrophoby problem. Not a minor one, to my opinion.

        PS: In 50 years from now, it is very likely that you will never have to work in Stuttgart while living in Munich. Even if you can get there and back in less than a hour, it makes very little sense. The only reasons why we would need to travel such distances that fast in the future would be for leasure, holydays, etc,…

    • František Kubiš Jr. - 7 years ago

      I would like to travel in this missile in vacuum tube, it’s not that much different from an airplane with an advantage of no turbulents.

      Second, Just like Musk said at unveiling the concept, there is no point to use it for short distances like 100km. You would spend more time getting to it than traveling by it. So Paris to Brussels is meaningful distance. And really best for LA to SF or LA to LV.

      Energy consumption should by much lower than HST, because it would travel by inertia without (well, just much much lower) air resistance and use energy only to getting up to the speed and from time to time increasing the current speed to maintain it.


Avatar for Fred Lambert Fred Lambert

Fred is the Editor in Chief and Main Writer at Electrek.

You can send tips on Twitter (DMs open) or via email:

Through, you can check out Fred’s portfolio and get monthly green stock investment ideas.