Tesla News & Discussion

pile-o-stone · 15 January 2020 at 4:03PM

GreatApe wrote: »

Hey stalker , I missed you
It's been five mins since you last stalked me
I was getting worried you'd given up

Yes I didn't think of the terrorists or a broken down EV clogging up a tunnel
Good thing terrorists are nice enough to not do anything on trains and good thing trains never break down because those would be easy ways to dismiss you so it's good that they can't ever happen

What would I do without you!!
:kisses3:

I understand you don't really like having the light of reason shone on your crazy ideas, but if you post them on a public forum then people will respond.

The difference with a train breaking down is that the following train can be coupled to it and can push it along. Not too many car owners will be chuffed having to get out in an underground tunnel and couple their car to a broken down one and shove it along - especially as they will undoubtedly have a different a different destination to the car they are pushing.

I've already covered the terrorist issue- you can pack much more explosives into a car than you can into a backpack.

You seem to have quietly neglected to address the other points I raised....

What about building the expense on/off ramps to replace the existing escalators and lifts down to the tube lines? what about the expense of building connecting tunnels between the existing tube lines? will there be enough space to fit the on/off ramps or do you envisage spiral ramps to the tunnels that replace the existing tube stations that the cars can drive down?

GreatApe · 15 January 2020 at 4:16PM

pile-o-stone wrote: »

I understand you don't really like having the light of reason shone on your crazy ideas, but if you post them on a public forum then people will respond.

I'm perfectly happy debating ideas good or bad or crazy

You know what they say Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people

Guess which one you're doing or trying to direct this to?
We're talking about me
I guess it could be worse
We could be talking about you

pile-o-stone · 15 January 2020 at 4:27PM

GreatApe wrote: »

I'm perfectly happy debating ideas good or bad or crazy

You know what they say Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people

Guess which one you're doing or trying to direct this to?
We're talking about me
I guess it could be worse
We could be talking about you

Interesting that you've now chosen to discuss me rather than discuss the holes I poked in your ideas. Small minds you say?

:rotfl:

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!! Your lack of self-awareness is staggering!:D

GreatApe · 15 January 2020 at 4:28PM

pile-o-stone wrote: »

I've already covered the terrorist issue- you can pack much more explosives into a car than you can into a backpack

Stop talking about explosives you'll get James bond on my !!! and I'm a giver not a taker

Your idea is silly. You don't target £40,000 BEVs that might have 4 passangers one of whom is you
Plus these acts are very rare because most people are sane

As for tunnels and breaking down I thought you lot were trying to sell me on the idea EVs don't break down :eek:

The solutions to this is easy
You can literally push/pull it out the way to the next exit
I'd also imagine 3 tunnels
One say north one south and one is a spare for maintenance and accidents if either of the other two have problems

Or of course simply design for lower rates of breakdowns
Dual motor and individual powerpack and electronics
That solves the power side
The only other thing is maybe wheel problems
Engineer to lower that risk too
Perhaps double tires like on vans so if one goes it's not game over

Anyway whatever it's clear I'm talking to a giant of a mind in you
I feel inferior and am starting to get panic attacks
Time to walk the imaginary dog woof woof

GreatApe · 15 January 2020 at 4:29PM

pile-o-stone wrote: »

Interesting that you've now chosen to discuss me rather than discuss the holes I poked in your ideas. Small minds you say?
:rotfl:
Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!! Your lack of self-awareness is staggering!:D

I love you too x

GreatApe · 15 January 2020 at 4:44PM

pile-o-stone wrote: »

What about building the expense on/off ramps to replace the existing escalators and lifts down to the tube lines? what about the expense of building connecting tunnels between the existing tube lines? will there be enough space to fit the on/off ramps or do you envisage spiral ramps to the tunnels that replace the existing tube stations that the cars can drive down?

Who said I want or think BEV tunnels should replace the existing tube network?
I said they make sense as new lines in existing cities and future mega cities
I'd imagine this would be a whole new level of public transport
Imagine a second tube network. An underground motorway in London

Imagine these more as like buses
Many many more stops
With stops resembling small car parks
With these BEVs coming above ground unloading the 4 passangers and picking up another 4

The ramps on/off wouldn't be too difficult you'd have the tunnel close to the surface near the station car parks or even totally on the surface. So the tunnel can surface every km or so. The cars that don't need to stop keep going past. The cars that do need to stop to let passangers off just exist at this point and the cars that need to enter enter at this point

These stations can be in underground's areas themselves like the basements of larger buildings like shopping centers or on the surface

The high acceleration and deceleration possibly with EVs would keep these surface stretches small. 0-60 in say 4 seconds means you'd only need a 'runway' of 60 meters. That's just 10 car lengths

Anyway you're boring me
If this relationship is going to work you need to spice thing up
I have to go tell off an emplyee for being unproductive over the last three weeks
I'll try to ignore how I spent the last hour or two hours :rotfl:

Martyn1981 · 15 January 2020 at 6:20PM

pile-o-stone wrote: »

I understand you don't really like having the light of reason shone on your crazy ideas, but if you post them on a public forum then people will respond.

The difference with a train breaking down is that the following train can be coupled to it and can push it along. Not too many car owners will be chuffed having to get out in an underground tunnel and couple their car to a broken down one and shove it along - especially as they will undoubtedly have a different a different destination to the car they are pushing.

I've already covered the terrorist issue- you can pack much more explosives into a car than you can into a backpack.

You seem to have quietly neglected to address the other points I raised....

What about building the expense on/off ramps to replace the existing escalators and lifts down to the tube lines? what about the expense of building connecting tunnels between the existing tube lines? will there be enough space to fit the on/off ramps or do you envisage spiral ramps to the tunnels that replace the existing tube stations that the cars can drive down?

Just a thought, and I can't back it up at all, just thinking out loud, but how about tunnels for cyclists?

Cardiff is suggesting a congestion charge now, add to this the cost of approx £1m/km of converting roads to cycle lane friendly, which seems to just involve the adding of an orange resin, and the Boring Company's suggestion of $10m/mile for a tunnel that can cope with a car, so perhaps two way cycling, would be a solution?

TBH cycling is great, and I used to do 2,500 - 3,500 miles pa, till an artic misjudged his overtake and broke my confidence (and my pelvis, arm, shoulder blade etc). Would be boring (no pun intended) in a tunnel, but safe and dry, and if one way, perhaps some wind assistance from the air supply system! :think:

pile-o-stone · 15 January 2020 at 6:40PM

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Just a thought, and I can't back it up at all, just thinking out loud, but how about tunnels for cyclists?

Cardiff is suggesting a congestion charge now, add to this the cost of approx £1m/km of converting roads to cycle lane friendly, which seems to just involve the adding of an orange resin, and the Boring Company's suggestion of $10m/mile for a tunnel that can cope with a car, so perhaps two way cycling, would be a solution?

TBH cycling is great, and I used to do 2,500 - 3,500 miles pa, till an artic misjudged his overtake and broke my confidence (and my pelvis, arm, shoulder blade etc). Would be boring (no pun intended) in a tunnel, but safe and dry, and if one way, perhaps some wind assistance from the air supply system! :think:

Bikes are the solution, not the problem. I think the answer is to ban cars from cities:
https://www.treehugger.com/cars/ban-cars-in-cities.html

"More than 40,000 Americans were killed by cars in 2016 — the equivalent of a fully-loaded Boeing 747 falling out of the sky once every three days. It’s more than the 33,000 annual gun deaths, and more than the 20,000-plus people killed by synthetic opioids that year. Half of those automobile fatalities occurred in urban areas; about 6,000 of them were pedestrians."

"It’s not just about banning cars. Cities also have to help their citizens live without a car. This means they must approve taller buildings, get rid of parking minimums, and expand public transit options. Build rail instead of roads. Turn gas stations into bike kiosks. Convert parking lots to sidewalks. Provide a fleet of low-speed zero-emission vehicles (like golf carts!) to make deliveries and help residents get around. And introduce better technology solutions to help everyone navigate the city more efficiently."

"Others believe that self-driving autonomous cars will save us, but one of the best threads I have seen on Twitter (and a great use of 280 characters) suggests otherwise."

This is the twitter post referenced:

"I am becoming convinced that autonomous vehicles are designed to solve the problem of "I live in a wealthy suburb but have a horrible car commute and don't want to drive anymore but also hate trains and buses.""

GreatApe · 15 January 2020 at 8:36PM

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Just a thought, and I can't back it up at all, just thinking out loud, but how about tunnels for cyclists?

Cardiff is suggesting a congestion charge now, add to this the cost of approx £1m/km of converting roads to cycle lane friendly, which seems to just involve the adding of an orange resin, and the Boring Company's suggestion of $10m/mile for a tunnel that can cope with a car, so perhaps two way cycling, would be a solution?

TBH cycling is great, and I used to do 2,500 - 3,500 miles pa, till an artic misjudged his overtake and broke my confidence (and my pelvis, arm, shoulder blade etc). Would be boring (no pun intended) in a tunnel, but safe and dry, and if one way, perhaps some wind assistance from the air supply system! :think:

No this is a bad idea the volume is too low (much lower speeds) and the size of tunnel is the same or bigger. A model 3 is 1.4 meters high while a tall person can be 2 meters tall plus they need some additional height for lights etc. Walkways/cycleways underground would also become places for the homeless for gangs and kids doing all sorts so nobody would use them

Cycle and scooters however could be above ground and follow major road lines in London
Maybe 5 meters above Street level and mostly glass or plastic so mostly see through and ideally very attractive

Only needs to hold two cycle and one walk line each direction so just 3 meters or so
High useage places like hospitals could even have a direct line into their building at 1st floor level

Especially with these 30 mile electric scooters I feel many many people would use them
They would also be faster than buses for sure
And super cheap as the electric for these things is something like 50 miles per KWh 0.1 penny a mile

I'd be very very pro this Have rentable electric scooters on these overground lines too
Every 1km or so you can have a staircase up/down and also lifts/ramps for the less able
But much more frequently for able body people you can have a much more basic pole to slide down and a very cheap mechanical pole climber to climb a pole up foir meters. Probably 95% of people can use that the other 5% could use the less frequent more costly stairs and lifts

GreatApe · 15 January 2020 at 8:52PM

pile-o-stone wrote: »

Bikes are the solution, not the problem. I think the answer is to ban cars from cities:

Not really probably more buses are the solution
The problem with bicycles is their high externality costs of pain and suffering
Seriously people fall and hurt themselves and any fuel or capital savings are lost in higher healthcare costs and a lot of personal cost in pain and suffering

Deaths are also very common I knew one guy who died while cycling due to a bus
Even I came within inches of being under a bus at age 17 cycling
Never again after that experience
Despite this I am pro bicycles and scooters
But where possible (sub 2 miles) people should simply walk Or take the bus

London bus prices for off peak should be reduced to just £1
And the number of routes increased
And of course they should be electrified
And the London bus network also expanded to the commuter towns for the same £1 off peak £1.50 on peak

Tesla News & Discussion

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free