Slashdot Mirror


Bombardier's Hot Wheel

Anonymous Chris writes "Following the release of the Segway, Bombardier (the makers of such things as Ski-Doo and Lynx snowmobiles) announce their prototype Embrio - a motorcycle-like unicycle that uses gyroscopes to balance itself and runs off hydrogen fuel cells. It also features a landing gear that automatically retracts once you reach 12 m.p.h. The story is at Forbes. You can also get more information directly from their website."

13 of 358 comments (clear)

  1. Perfect... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is just the perfect thing for everyone who already has a motorcycle, and has been routinely frustrated with their inability to donate organs.

    1. Re:Perfect... by tinrobot · · Score: 4, Funny

      The question is, then, what extra benefits does it add over a motorcycle

      For one, your replacement tire budget is cut in half...

  2. Fun design. What's the point? by JanneM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The design is really, really cool. But other than that, I don't really see the advantage of this. It seems to give no advantage compared to a normal bike, and has quite a few disadvantages (less space, more complexity). Throwing in a fuel cell-based drivetrain could just as easily (if not easier) be done for a two-wheeled bike as well - and would incidentally be a pretty good idea (with the electric motors in the wheels, you would get rid of the chain, and could have practical two-wheel drive).

    --
    Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    1. Re:Fun design. What's the point? by tarquin_fim_bim · · Score: 5, Insightful

      On the cited 'website' they used the word concept about a dozen times, it is exactly that, a concept. A design tool to invite discussion, and induce comment. What would you imagine the advantage of having two driven wheels on a motorcycle might be, apart from to get you to the next accident more quickly?

  3. yeah.. by temojen · · Score: 4, Funny

    Because those segways were selling like hotcakes we thought we'd get in the market too.

  4. Any bets... by FullCircle · · Score: 4, Funny

    Any bets that front wheel was added after Segways with dead batteries started dropping people on their faces?

    --
    If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. - James Madison
  5. Seen it, thought it was cool but.... by kidgenius · · Score: 4, Informative

    I saw this in PopSci about a month or two ago. Personally, I think this is friggin awesome!!!!! But, it's also dangerous as hell. You think it's hard to see a motorcycle, or hell, even a car in your blind spot? How about someone on a vehicle who's helment (if they so chose to wear one) would probably not even get higher than the side window of car. You'd be sideswiped before you got five minutes from your house.

  6. One essential bit... by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the article: The vehicle is designed as a guess at what transportation in the year 2025 might look like.

    This might be pretty darn accurate. The thing that sets this apart from the Segway is one crucial element: Speed. If a Segway malfunctions you're not going wery fast... but with a vehicle like this you're pretty much doomed if there is a serious malfunction. At the very least the car behind you will run you over.

    Current vehicles like cars and motorcycles can be stopped safely if you run out of power/propulsion, but something like this has to have safeguards which keeps that from happening.

    Back to the whole 2025 thing: In order to make this stuff safe it requires testing, testing and some more testing. An that requires time.

    Don't get me wrong... I love the idea, but it has to be done correctly and without compromises.

    --
    .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
  7. Room for one more? by morganjharvey · · Score: 4, Funny

    From the manufacturers page:

    the EMBRIO uses a complex series of sensors and gyroscopes to balance one or more human passengers on a single wheel.

    Judging by the picture on the same page, I'm really rather curious where the "or more" would fit.

    1. Re:Room for one more? by zurab · · Score: 4, Funny

      Have you been to a circus lately?

  8. dangerous = don't make it by kaltkalt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's so sad we've come to calling an idea "stupid" simply because it is easily conceivable as to how someone could hurt themselves with it. Whatever happened to assumption of risk? Those hoverboards in back to the future 2 (and 3) could really hurt someone if they're not careful, that doesn't mean it is something mankind should never get to voluntarily experience. Products liability is a good thing, but there has to be limitations. Wear a fucking helmet and don't cry when you get hurt. Products liability is holding us back... it's like intellectual property in that respect. It hinders innovation. Will we get sued for infringement? Will we get sued because people will hurt themselves? The bottom line is unavoidably unsafe products are too risky to develop nowadays, and that's a shame because they're quite often the coolest, most innovative, interesting things man ever makes.

    --

    Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
    1. Re:dangerous = don't make it by BigRedFish · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Whatever happened to assumption of risk?

      Yeah, I see where you're coming from, I'm old enough to remember high-dives at public swimming pools, trampoline parks, skate parks, and all that.

      OTOH, there's one big difference between this device (or a Segway for that matter) and a similarly dangerous vehicle such as a motorcycle: unlike the motorcycle, they're defective by design.

      Motorcycles have a secondary method of stabilization when moving, as a side effect of the forks pivoting against the frame, allowing the vehicle's mass to move perpendicular to the direction of motion. This allows one to keep the bike upright even if one loses power.

      These unicycle things, and Segways (all the costs of two wheels, none of the benefits!) do not have any secondary method of stabilization should the power or on-board gyro system fail, and this too is by design. Given that a certain number of failures will inevitably occur (ya really gotta hope these gadgets age gracefully), and the result of failure is inevitably catastrophic, I would call the design defective. Anyone who's ever had to replace a malfunctioning fuel-injection sensor in their car should be rightly terrified.

      This kind of tech might be acceptable in military aircraft, where the probability of in-flight computer failure killing the pilot is small compared to the maneuvering advantage it gives the pilot in combat, which is a life-threatening situation to begin with. In consumer vehicles, however, it's an unacceptable risk if better designs exist.

      And for what? 'Cause it looks cool? There's no advantage in a unicycle design. It's a liability. Why convert to alternative fuel, just to waste it fighting gravity when you could use a known stable design and not have to? At least they had the good sense to label it a concept vehicle, but I certainly hope that intentionally unstable vehicle designs with no fault-tolerance are NOT the norm in 2050. This is one of those instances, I think, where just because you can doesn't mean you should.

  9. Excellent! by Shonufftheshogun · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hordes of clowns have been waiting YEARS for innovation in the unicycle industry.