11–20 of 164 posts
It would be ideal to become an autonomous vehicle. Most people drive to work by themselves and use a car instead of a motorbike for protection from the elements and collisions.
Imagine how much more efficient the road network would be if it was filled with autonomous gyro-stabilized motorbikes/whatever this is.
If they added two more wheels instead of the gyros, they'd get passive stabilization and lower cost. They'd also get more room for a larger battery and cargo or passengers. And since roads and parking lots are already designed for 4-wheel vehicles, the extra width wouldn't be much of a disadvantage.
So… a car hitting the side then?
If they added two more wheels instead of the gyros, they'd get passive stabilization and lower cost. They'd also get more room for a larger battery and cargo or passengers. And since roads and parking lots are already designed for 4-wheel vehicles, the extra width wouldn't be much of a disadvantage.
This has effects beyond the two-wheeled rider; Remember, you're never stuck in traffic, you are traffic. A recent study suggested that if 10% of car drivers switched to two-wheeled vehicles, congestion would reduce by 40%[1]. Currently, riders of motorcycles are at an exceptionally high risk of death or serious injury. A fully enclosed two-wheeler could be every bit as safe as a car.
There are also substantial efficiency savings to be made, due to the C1's very small frontal area. A faired two-wheeler with a recumbent seating position is naturally very close to the aerodynamically ideal dolphin-shape. A four-wheeled vehicle could only achieve similar aerodynamic efficiency by being very long and low, with single or tandem seating, as in the Volkswagen 1L concept[2] or Shell Eco-Marathon competitors. This substantially compromises visibility and turning circle, making such a vehicle very poorly suited to its obvious use as an urban commuter.
[1] http://www.acem.eu/publiq/PTW_Belgium_Study_FEBIAC_ENG.PDF [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car
How much force would it take to knock the C1 on its side? According to Lit, a small elephant would have to hit it broadside to put the C1 on the ground. So… a car hitting the side then?
If they added two more wheels instead of the gyros, they'd get passive stabilization and lower cost. They'd also get more room for a larger battery and cargo or passengers. And since roads and parking lots are already designed for 4-wheel vehicles, the extra width wouldn't be much of a disadvantage.
Remember the last two-wheeled, gyro-stabilized future of transportation? The one that was largely a commercial flop, and which the company president ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Heselden ) _drove off a cliff_.
The segway does what it's supposed to do. I think it has it's useful niche. It was marketed as a replacement for all transportation, but that is silly because only because of the cost.
Remember the last two-wheeled, gyro-stabilized future of transportation? The one that was largely a commercial flop, and which the company president ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Heselden ) _drove off a cliff_.
Reminds me of the BMW C1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_C1
Country A will insist that it's a motorbike, require you to wear a helmet and have an enhanced heavy bike licence (because of it's top speed)
Country B will insist that it's a car and require seatbelts, airbags etc.
Country C will only allow electric bikes that have a top speed of 15m/h