1/3 of the picture
I guess I'm just puzzled by your assessment. Hey, everybody has a right to their opinion. But I'm worried that your opinion is based on a complete lack of information. (don't worry, it is not a complete lack of information)
Let me go over a few of your statements one by one... (good points, but lets skip to your final wrap-up, that summarizes it all)
But, hey, if you don't like vehicles that go 140 miles an hour, get over 100 miles per gallon, and can maneuver the roads like a jet airplane, then that's OK!
Derwin
Derwin, first, the 2nd 1/3 of this issue; just where would you drive such a vehicle? Then the 3rd part; just who would drive such a vehicle?
Like you mention, the Autobahn might work for where, but what is the cost to build an infrastructure across this nation for such a roadway? Even just one? This past weekend I took a ride out to the VLA (Very Large Array radio telescopes). Here is what the road looked like.
(actually, the VLA is in the valley, hidden by the trees on the left)
Two lanes, wide paved shoulders, straight as an arrow for about 20 miles, speed limit 60 mph. The road surface would not support going faster (to my limited abilities) 90 mph, but I would rate it as good. Twice I had to brake for cows. Once for a coyote. I saw a couple of dozen Pronghorn antelope, but they stayed off the road. I noticed about 6 snakes that had not. Two sections of the road in the valley had gravel and dirt spills on them. This stretch was being lightly traveled, so less than 20 cars and trucks were in the oncoming lane. Nobody passed me or was visible in my mirrors (I was going the speed limit). There were two vehicles maybe 5 to 10 miles ahead of me. How much would it cost to make this stretch of road safe for a Simple vehicle to travel at 140 mph in all weather and seasons? Raise it? Enclose it? Widen and segregate other traffic? Convert railroad tracks to Simple Roadways? How much to resurface and maintain high speed roadways and keep them clear of debris? What was the cost of the Bullet Train infrastructure - it requires similar special considerations. Infrastructure costs for new technologies are a major hurdle. Building the infrastructures for things like cell phones, highways, electricity, bridges, roadways, water systems, pipelines, railways, and so on are incredibly expensive. Maintaining them is also very expensive.
Actually, this became an immediate issue for the Segway ( a brilliant piece of engineering - I know the wheels don't swivel, but maybe some day ). Where would you ride it? The road? The sidewalks? Bike Paths? Wherever? Where would you park it? The usual places? At your desk? What about riding in buildings? Until the infrastructure is there, it won't be anything but a "pedestrian novelty" - no matter how clever it is. Even 'lower-tech' things have this problem - like skateboards, roller-skates, and bicycles. And given the picture, Simple looks like it has less ground clearance than the Spyder - not good even on a lot of poorly maintained city streets.
The Simple vehicle does look like it can integrate into lots of existing roadway infrastructure, but with no real value besides its mileage. The highest speed limit in the US is ( I believe ) 85mph in parts of Texas, so Simple has at least an excess 50mph built into it.
And finally, how many drivers do you know and see around you every day that are capable of 'going 140 miles an hour and maneuvering the (existing) roads like a jet airplane'. (and you can't count Doc, Setho, or 3wheeldemon) The picture that comes to my mind is something that would appear in the Darwin Awards. (actually, I speculate that with Simple's wheel configuration it must have a Nanny system that makes the Spyders look like a total zero and only in a highly engineered environment, would it ever be able to get close to its speed potentials). I personally think one of the great accomplishments of Civilization is that fact that most of the time, people drive on the correct side of the road and kind-of stay in their lanes. If we could properly use horns and turn signals, that would be a miracle.
So, well engineered concept, looks like a Disney World Space Mountain ride, expensive, requires special infrastructure to reach masses and commercial viability (gazillons expensive), even with a Nanny system it generally beyond the operating capabilities of 50% of the population (much like cars), does not reflect the vast majority's life style needs (kids, dogs, luggage, furniture moves, groceries, tools, family drives, vacations, etc.).
Derwin, I can tell you love this stuff and follow it closely. I am only saying it is just 1/3 of the solution. It won't be more than a novelty if the other 2/3rds are not addressed. It has a better chance than the Flying Car, but many of the same problems. Yup, that is my opinion. My wish is that we all were better and capable of doing things like this. I am old. It won't be in my lifetime. Just in the movies.
Tom
opcorn:
