The 300 km/h Superbus

It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by Frosty+Piss · 2012-07-09 07:30 · Score: 5, Interesting

First of all, the "thing" at the web site referenced is not a bus, itâ(TM)s a stretch limo. For example, the article goes on to say "The bus, which is better described as a sex-oozing cigarette-car..." Itâ(TM)s not a bus.

Secondly, yes, I like the idea of a 200 MPH bus. As long as it is mechanically fixed in some way to a dedicated road â" maybe with something like a continuous piece of metal to guide it and prevent it from careening into space...

Lastly, what's with the link to some advert-laden page-view magnet, instead of a direct link to the website of the project in question? Does Slashdot employ editors anymore? Did they ever?

Here it is: http://www.superbusproject.com/

--
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.

Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by Ichijo · 2012-07-09 07:39 · Score: 5, Insightful

As long as you're using a continuous piece of metal to keep it on the road, you could energize that metal and eliminate the need for batteries.

--
Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by mapkinase · 2012-07-09 07:42 · Score: 1

>dedicated road
Yes. That would fly.

--
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by AMDinator · 2012-07-09 07:45 · Score: 2, Insightful

At that point, you might as well just build a train.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by Baloroth · 2012-07-09 07:47 · Score: 5, Funny

One that makes a "Whoooosh!" sound would be preferable, I think.

--
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by Antipater · 2012-07-09 07:48 · Score: 5, Funny

And TFS also says it runs super-silent. So you'd have to give it an artifical noise, to warn passers-by that it's approaching. Like, I dunno, "Choo-choo!" or similar.

--
Everything is better with chainsaws.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by vlm · 2012-07-09 07:54 · Score: 4, Funny

So you'd have to give it an artifical noise, to warn passers-by that it's approaching. Like, I dunno, "Choo-choo!" or similar.
Thomas the tank engine theme song?

--
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by jellomizer · 2012-07-09 07:55 · Score: 2

I am not sure a Super-Bus will solve our Mass Transpiration needs. I find the issue isn't as much about the Top Speed of the Bus. But the logistics of getting enough people to fill it up, and Drop them off in the right spots.
Having a rail line, or a bus lane, only helps in particular areas.
For Americans we are often much too spread out for good mass transit. Getting from Point A to Point B will take 3 hours. For 10 miles... It is actually faster to Bike, then to take the bus. Unless you are in NYC or Boston. Where you can take the Subway or the T... Then Mass transit makes more sense.

--
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by chispito · 2012-07-09 08:03 · Score: 1

I don't think it's practical, but I get the point. Think of this as a train that can adjust local stops on the fly before being embarking on regional "railways."

--
The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 08:05 · Score: 1

Aww.... I'm sorry you're retarded.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by russotto · 2012-07-09 08:28 · Score: 1

It is actually faster to Bike, then to take the bus. Unless you are in NYC or Boston.
In NYC, a Big Wheel beats the bus. That's not a fluke, either; I've beaten the M14 just walking.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by Anne_Nonymous · 2012-07-09 08:32 · Score: 2

That "Whooooosh!" is a pretty good indicator of too much air resistance.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by BlueStrat · 2012-07-09 08:35 · Score: 2

>dedicated road

Yes. That would fly.
Quite a hazard to aircraft, though I'm puzzled as to why it would be a necessary requirement.
Strat

--
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by Unknown+Lamer · 2012-07-09 08:37 · Score: 3, Insightful

If you build the rail, people will live there. The only reason people live by highways is because ... the highway was put there to attract residential development.
Raleigh is currently suffering major growing pains, and unfortunately the state has chosen to build a highway through farmlands to house everyone... yeah, I definitely want to live 40 miles from RTP in the middle of nowhere and commute with $5/gal gas looming on the horizon... no, building a light rail system and encouraging people to live in the Raleigh/Durham corridor is a waste of money I tell you.
Where there is rail, people will use it. See NYC (commuting into NYC from Long Island is a breeze on the train, effectively impossible by car, and that's a good thing), Boston, DC, etc. DC to a lesser extent because the Metro hasn't expanded into areas where people live, but MARC is tolerable if you only need to go into the city in the morning and back out in the evening.
The whole "we're too spread out" argument is perfectly valid in the midwest though... and luckily most of our population exists hugging the coast lines. So... highways for the midwesterners, rail for the rest of us! Unfortunately, U.S. central policy is obsessed with "one solution for every part of our geographically diverse land" for whatever reason.

--

HAL 7000, fewer features than the HAL 9000, but just as homicidal!
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by LanMan04 · 2012-07-09 08:37 · Score: 3, Funny

They're two, they're four, they're six, they're eight,
Shunting trucks and hauling freight!
Red and green and brown and blue,
They're the really useful crew!
Why, yes, I DO have a 3 year old! Why do you ask?

--
With the first link, the chain is forged.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by AmiMoJo · 2012-07-09 09:00 · Score: 4, Interesting

You're doing it wrong. Instead of trying to graft a mass transport system on to a city you need to make new destinations that mass transport can take you to. In Japan the rail companies build big stations in new places, complete with attached shopping centre, and it becomes a destination in itself. That then helps relieve congestion in other areas too.
Ideally you want to design around transport, but since we have big cities that need to be dealt with this is a good option for re-engineering them.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by king_grumpy · 2012-07-09 09:01 · Score: 1

Current hybrid cars have scared me half to death on my daily cycle to work - imagine a freaking sex oozing cigarette car passing by going CHOOOCHOOOOO.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by jamesh · 2012-07-09 10:10 · Score: 1

Current hybrid cars have scared me half to death on my daily cycle to work - imagine a freaking sex oozing cigarette car passing by going CHOOOCHOOOOO.
Worse, imagine arriving at work covered in cigarette car sex ooze!
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by tqk · 2012-07-09 10:57 · Score: 1

Why do I continue to come here and read the drivel that gets posted or the ridiculous responses that such trivial matters illicit from the great Slashed masses?
Masochism? Either that, or it gives you some sort of right to yell up the stairs to your Mom "I'm busy!" when she calls you to come and take out the garbage.

--
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by xaxa · 2012-07-09 10:59 · Score: 1

That's awful... when I was three years old this was the theme.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 11:03 · Score: 5, Funny

Worse, imagine arriving at work covered in cigarette car sex ooze!
I believe the proper term is NICTOJIZM.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by zlives · 2012-07-09 11:22 · Score: 1

+1 funny
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by TapeCutter · 2012-07-09 11:40 · Score: 1

When I was three Ringo had just started banging drums on the radio.

--
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by TheInternetGuy · 2012-07-09 12:15 · Score: 1

And TFS also says it runs super-silent. So you'd have to give it an artifical noise, to warn passers-by that it's approaching. Like, I dunno, "Choo-choo!" or similar.
How about "Whooosh"?

--
If my comment didn't sound as good in your head as it did in mine, then I guess we all know who's to blame
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by jellomizer · 2012-07-09 23:53 · Score: 1

But Europe is so packed that you don't need to travel 40 miles. The United States is 3rd in population, but 50th in Population Density. That means infrastructure projects in the United States are much harder then in Europe.
In many States, we have some strong weather extreams too. For example NY state gets to the mid to high 90 with high humidity during the summer (So your car is going to need AC) in the winter is is not uncommon to get snow storms that drop 2-3 feet of snow over night, sure they plow the roads, but if it is still snowing there is usually still a few inches. So if you live a little bit off the beaten path, you may want a 4x4 to get from point A to point B. (and Other States actually have more extremism weather then NY) They won't close the roads.
Being the distance and rougher terrain we need personal transportation almost all the time unless we live and work in the same City.
The United State of America is not Europe. We are very different from Europe, While the majority of us share a common ancestral past, we live in a different cultures.
By the way most Americans Don't have SUVs, they have more modest cars. I actually drive a Prius C. And most of the cars at my works parking lot are not SUVs there are a lot of them, but they are not the majority. But of those who have Trucks and SUVs usually have good reasons to be owning them.

--
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by flyneye · 2012-07-10 00:03 · Score: 1

You'd like it till you rode in it that fast.
Have you honestly rode/ driven anything over 150 mph? At 160 phone poles actually begin picket fence illusion. at 180 you realize gforce has you firmly back in your seat and every pebble in the road becomes a factor in handling.At 200 mph you pray your tires( rated for no more than 80 mph) don't come apart and any vibration your car ever had comes to life like a percussion section. This test has personally been conducted by me using a Mach I with a 429 cobra jet, a 73 XKE, a 73 Challenger 440 mag w/6pk, and a 79 T.A. w/403 olds special. Results don't vary.

--
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by schroedingers_hat · 2012-07-10 03:17 · Score: 1

I tried that once with a jar of pistachios. It's really not that great, they're pointy and hard and they dig in to your penis. I don't know what all the hype is -- there probably aren't nearly as many middle easterners doing it as you'd think.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by schroedingers_hat · 2012-07-10 03:40 · Score: 1

Depends on the vehicle. I've been almost that fast in the passenger side of a car (don't remember what it was), it felt fairly quick. 130-140mph can feel kinda slow and cruisy on a modern sports bike (to the point where you have to be _extremely_ careful in what you do with the throttle), whereas 60mph can feel faster/more dangerous by comparison on a 2-stroke from the 70s. A larger bike from the late 60s felt like it was going to fall apart at 110.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by anyGould · 2012-07-10 08:25 · Score: 1

But that whoosh has to be "silent."
Of course, they'll promptly be required to add noise in order to warn pedestrians.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! by cynyr · 2012-07-14 14:48 · Score: 1

a 4x4 for a little snow?!!*
Says that man the grew up in MN, went to college in the upper penisula of MI near the lake, and is back in MN now and has always driven a front wheel drive car... (granted I did lose the rear end once while not messing around, but it was on a well plowed road with no snow coming down, just some ice.)

--
All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.

Yawn by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 07:33 · Score: 4, Informative

I'll pass, I saw the film: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Bus

Re:Yawn by kmahan · 2012-07-09 08:06 · Score: 1

One of the best parts of that movie is how the tire changes happen -- at full speed and the old tire is ejected off to the side.

--
Invalid Checksum. Retrying.

I saw that movie... by Kenja · 2012-07-09 07:33 · Score: 4, Funny

was funny in pats I guess.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Bus

--

"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"

Re:I saw that movie... by P-niiice · 2012-07-09 07:56 · Score: 1

YES! I loved that movie.

Please be aware by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 07:33 · Score: 5, Funny

That the bathroom is broken, and the next stop is in 1500 miles.

Re:Please be aware by GrumpySteen · 2012-07-09 09:21 · Score: 1

With the quoted battery rage of 200 km/125 miles per charge, you'd have 12 stops in that 1500 miles just to swap batteries out. With stops that frequent, I doubt there would ever be a need for an on-board bathroom.

Sounds super by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 07:34 · Score: 1

The bus runs on batteries, and it can fly along at nearly 300 km/h (or 192 mph), and quite 'silently.'

Great, as if it wasn't easy enough to get hit by a bus before, they went and invented one that can do 192 MPH while making no noise...

Re:Sounds super by Hal_Porter · 2012-07-09 10:20 · Score: 2

You could put a padded cow catcher on the front to loft pedestrians harmlessly over the top of the vehicle.

--
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;

Transport Tycoon Deluxe by guruevi · 2012-07-09 07:36 · Score: 2

If I'm not mistaken, there was a SuperBus in there as well that did 300km/h

--
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com

Re:Transport Tycoon Deluxe by Surt · 2012-07-09 07:54 · Score: 1

And, unlike your mustang, you can share the ride with more than 4 smelly passengers.

--
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
Re:Transport Tycoon Deluxe by sycodon · 2012-07-09 08:02 · Score: 1

Well, with the rear seat delete option, I can only take one. But I have room for groceries!
And..Silent? FTS!
I paid extra for the better sounding exhaust.

--
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Re:Transport Tycoon Deluxe by KGIII · 2012-07-09 08:04 · Score: 1

On the other hand, it most likely handles better than your Mustang. ;)
I had to... No, I really did.

--
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Re:Transport Tycoon Deluxe by Surt · 2012-07-09 08:19 · Score: 1

If you delete the rear seat that should make room for an additional two passengers, if you stack them right.

--
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
Re:Transport Tycoon Deluxe by sycodon · 2012-07-09 08:22 · Score: 2

Uh Oh...must be one of those Camaro owners - Eternally jealous. :-)

--
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Re:Transport Tycoon Deluxe by sycodon · 2012-07-09 08:24 · Score: 1

Yeah...for the cost of my Shelby, I could buy a rear view mirror for a "real performance car".
But I can still go almost as fast and look twice as cool. Well, as long as they don't actually see me.

--
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.

A 300mph bus? by Lucas123 · 2012-07-09 07:40 · Score: 1

Just don't let Lucky Star Bus Line get a hold of it. They have a hard enough time not flipping their 70mph buses.

A bus with no storage space by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-09 07:41 · Score: 2, Informative

For those times when you want to go somewhere, but you don't want to take anything with you or bring anything back.

In other words, fine for going from your hotel to your business meeting, but that's about it. Like a limo without the privacy and quiet. I can't imagine a use for this that would justify dedicated 200km/h lanes.

Re:A bus with no storage space by vlm · 2012-07-09 08:01 · Score: 1

For those times when you want to go somewhere, but you don't want to take anything with you or bring anything back.
In other words, fine for going from your hotel to your business meeting, but that's about it. Like a limo without the privacy and quiet. I can't imagine a use for this that would justify dedicated 200km/h lanes.
I'm not a sports fan, but this sounds ideal for regional sports "away games". Faster than a plane because of no security theater, while fast enough to get to The Big Game in a reasonable amount of time.
For example the closest pro football team is a good 2 hours away at 75 MPH, but using that 2 hour criteria suddenly there's at least 4, maybe 5 within range?
Sports is pretty much just an excuse for excessive drinking, and I imagine the motion sickness would be worse at 300 KMH than 90 KMH so that might get a bit messy.

--
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Re:A bus with no storage space by Nethead · 2012-07-09 12:05 · Score: 2

Three words: Elk, Deer, and Moose.

--
-- I have a private email server in my basement.

The Onion thought of it already by ClickOnThis · 2012-07-09 07:42 · Score: 1

http://www.theonion.com/video/obama-replaces-costly-highspeed-rail-plan-with-hig,18473/

--
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.

Tonight on Top Gear! by Moheeheeko · 2012-07-09 07:43 · Score: 1

James drives something slowly!

Richard wears a hat!

And I build the fastest bus...........in the world.

Re:Tonight on Top Gear! by fiannaFailMan · 2012-07-09 07:48 · Score: 1

If it were a food ...... it'd be corn on the cob.

--
Drill baby drill - on Mars

Re:(or 192 mph) by galadran · 2012-07-09 07:45 · Score: 1

Significant digits, motherfucker! Do you know them?

I've not read the article, but 300 can have 1, 2 or 3 significant figures. If I'm measuring a length to three significant digits and it happens to be precisely 200, I've not lost precision...

Ok... by jasno · 2012-07-09 07:45 · Score: 2

Ok, so it's not really designed for mass public transportation, but it looks like it shows some concepts which could be easily applied to mass-transit, long-distance buses.

Does anyone else think that self-driving, high-speed buses like that would eliminate the need for high-speed rail? With billions about to be spent on technology from the 1800's, it seems like there are other options which are much better suited to fulfilling America's transportation needs.

--

http://www.masturbateforpeace.com/

Re:Ok... by fiannaFailMan · 2012-07-09 07:50 · Score: 1

Any subsequent posts that denounce the cost of the California HSR deserve to be modded off-topic, because that'll degenerate into a total flame war.

--
Drill baby drill - on Mars
Re:Ok... by bhtooefr · 2012-07-09 07:51 · Score: 2

Metal wheels on metal rail have significantly lower rolling resistance than rubber tires on asphalt or concrete, though. And, the infrastructure for rail is better suited to providing electricity to a train (partially because there's already metal to metal contact) than the infrastructure for roads.
Re:Ok... by CanHasDIY · 2012-07-09 07:59 · Score: 4, Insightful

Does anyone else think that self-driving, high-speed buses like that would eliminate the need for high-speed rail?
Well, sure!

... Except, according to TU Delft's website, the feasibility of their 'superbus' is dependent on...

Wait for it...

Dedicated roadways! You know, like the ones trains run on, sans rails. So, not all that different after all (light rail actually wins out on this one, thanks to the ability to actually attach the vehicle to the infrastructure...)

--
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Re:Ok... by jasno · 2012-07-09 08:00 · Score: 1

Well polyurethane 'tweels' are in development which should improve the rolling resistance(cuts it 'by half' in one article from 2005).
The infrastructure, and more importantly land rights, for roads already exist, vs the tremendous cost and hassle of laying new rail lines.
Buses can adapt to changing transportation needs quickly, unlike rail lines which take years(or decades).
Natural gas is cheap and plentiful. Is electricity the only option? I don't think so. I'd bet that future battery technology along with the efficiency improvements given by autonomous vehicles will lessen the benefits of rail over self-powered vehicles.

--

http://www.masturbateforpeace.com/
Re:Ok... by jasno · 2012-07-09 08:04 · Score: 2

Yeah but that requirement is obviously driven by the presence of human-piloted vehicles on the roadways.
In 25 years, do you think you'll be able to drive your own car anymore? I doubt it. Autonomous vehicles are coming, and I suspect that in a quarter century we'll be regulating human-operated vehicles off public roads.

--

http://www.masturbateforpeace.com/
Re:Ok... by vlm · 2012-07-09 08:05 · Score: 2

Finally self driving trains are technologically a bit less complicated than self driving cars.
I'm surprised no one has started outsourcing train/car/taxi driving to India. Well, I've seen the traffic in India... But the point I'm making is you could have any odd number of people cooperatively drive the vehicle. Since we're destroying the middle class intentionally we'll have nothing but ultra rich and ultra poor so we don't need self driving buses if the only thing on the road is ultra-luxury limos and for-profit prison cattle wagons, but if you demand a non-present driver it would seen teleoperation would be much simpler than hard AI.
Trains are even simpler because if you lose signal, simply apply the E-brake and its all good, unlike cars.

--
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Re:Ok... by amorsen · 2012-07-09 08:11 · Score: 3, Interesting

Metal wheels on rail also makes for generally lousy acceleration and braking, which in turn leads to complicated safety systems and long gaps between trains. Building a road for this ought to be a lot cheaper than electric high speed rail.
Of course that is no use if the bus is extremely expensive. Current trains can easily cost USD 50,000 per seat, so if it can get anywhere near that figure it is a win. Operating costs may be higher, at least until it is made driverless.
The big question is whether people will use it. Right now there is a "rail effect" where putting in a rail service with exactly the same characteristics as a bus service will attract perhaps a third more passengers. Even if it isn't faster or more reliable. Missing out on 1/4th of the passengers could easily kill off this idea.

--
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
Re:Ok... by vlm · 2012-07-09 08:20 · Score: 1

Buses can adapt to changing transportation needs quickly,
Privately owned / rented bus / school bus, yes. Public, Heck no. Pay attention to your local paper, you'll get 50 bureaucrats and 25 elected officials debating for hours and fighting with the mayor about exactly where to place the bus stop relative to the new condo development. That's before the lawsuit gets filed by the condo developer and it all drags on. And every two horse suburb wants to set up their own service with their own schedule and damn everyone else who doesn't want to follow their transfer schedule, after all they screwed us over on the water rights so we'll get even by not picking up their residents at the transfer station for 2 hours. Meanwhile the owner of the senior citizen apartment building was supposed to sell that building to the mayors wife at a discount, but he decided against it after all, so I guess its bus service is getting pulled (true story... until after the trial they were hiring chartering buses for the elderly residents to visit walmart etc) It just goes on and on. Its not any better, or worse, than trains. Its just train construction is a more obvious project so people think it takes longer. Both are roughly equally corrupt anemic and slow.

--
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Re:Ok... by Eric+S.+Smith · 2012-07-09 08:37 · Score: 1

That's all it is, another lane.

With vehicles moving at 300 km/h on it, you're going to need a bit more segregation than a painted line, if only to keep other traffic from being sucked into the wake of the "super bus."

--
Mind the Gap
Re:Ok... by CanHasDIY · 2012-07-09 08:59 · Score: 1

Yeah but that requirement is obviously driven by the presence of human-piloted vehicles on the roadways.
Would be nice if you had reference what you mean by "that requirement"... Assuming you mean it in reference to dedicated roadways, it's not 'human-piloted' that's the issue, so much as the sheer volume of traffic. 250 million cars on the road is 250 million cars on the road, regardless of who's controlling them.

On top of that, thanks to our continuing foray into the abject failure that is trickle-down economics (/rant), people are hanging on their cars for much, much longer... If the trend continues, 25 years from now the majority of cars on the road very well may be 2012 model years.

In 25 years, do you think you'll be able to drive your own car anymore? I doubt it. Autonomous vehicles are coming, and I suspect that in a quarter century we'll be regulating human-operated vehicles off public roads.
First off, assuming we don't extinguish our species by then (always a possibility), who gets to drive what and where will be the least of our problems.
Second, 25 years is a long time in the socio-political and technological sense. Who knows what might happen? Any prediction that far out is pretty much guaranteed to be incorrect. Otherwise, we'd all have been flying our jetpacks to moon condos by the 1980s.

Thrid, no, I don't think I'll be able to drive my own car, I know it, and for several seemingly obvious reasons:

- Not everyone will want/be able to jump on to the self-driving car bandwagon.
- Preventing people from operating their own motor vehicles on publicly funded roads is a Constitutional violation of the right to travel freely
- Upgrades to the entire country's infrastructure would have to be decided, approved, and funded by Congress... you know, the fucktards who are typically so busy arguing about petty bullshit like spoiled 8-year-olds, they appear incapable of so much as considering such important matters.
- Again from the political angle, "regulating human-operated vehicles off public roads" sound commie. Nobody (in America, from an idiot-political standpoint) likes commies.
- There are almost 60 million miles of paved roads that would have to be altered, and another million miles of unpaved roads which, more than likely, would be ignored. No big deal for those living in highly urbanized areas, but what about those of us who live in the boonies? Your self-driving car would never make it within 10 miles of my country home.
- "Death by GPS," only w/ self-driving cars, you can't blame it on human error. Can't wait for the flood of lawsuits because of a simple map glitch (['turning left here' "Shit, that's a ravine, NNNNNOOOOOOOOOooooooooo..." SPLAT] * [every car on the road] = [one really big fucking mess])

I do imagine there will be a fair number of automated autos on the roads within the next 25 years, but the idea that they will completely replace human-controlled autos is specious at best.

--
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Re:Ok... by amliebsch · 2012-07-09 09:38 · Score: 1

Or, if you want to get really crazy sci-fi, a kind of jet-powered "superbus" made out of lightweight materials like composites and aluminum, that travels above the roads and doesn't require any infrastructure between the start and end points at all! It could go much faster and could travel in direct routes, disregarding terrain altogether. Maybe someday...

--
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
Re:Ok... by CrimsonAvenger · 2012-07-09 10:36 · Score: 1

On top of that, thanks to our continuing foray into the abject failure that is trickle-down economics (/rant), people are hanging on their cars for much, much longer... [time.com]
The article you quoted blames better cars, not "trickle-down" economics for the "problem" you mention.
I'm not actually sure why you think that raising taxes (presumably on the rich) would affect how long anyone keeps their cars, though.
Personally, I drive them to a couple hundred thousand miles and change before I sell one. But I wouldn't change my habits toward newer cars if my taxes were raised, and certainly wouldn't if someone else's taxes were raised....

--

"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Re:Ok... by Hal_Porter · 2012-07-09 10:37 · Score: 1

I wonder how efficient a ground effect vehicle would be?
http://www.damninteresting.com/ground-effect-vehicles/
A regular jumbo jet is already pretty good in terms of mpg/passenger, and ground effect is supposed to be better.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704901104575423261677748380.html

The sweet spot for fuel economy is often the basic single-aisle jet, often producing mpg better than bigger planes and superior to smaller regional jets as well. Boeing says the champ in its current line-up is the 737-900 with 180 passengers flying 1,000 miles. It gets nearly 99 mpg. The plane with the best average mpg in Airbus's current line-up is the A320 family.
At the other extreme, once the engines become viable you could imagine skimming the surface of the atmosphere in a space plane at hypersonic speeds.
It's a shame the US Government is spending billions on 19th Century technology instead of spending millions on scramjets or whatever the most promising contender is.

--
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Re:Ok... by Hal_Porter · 2012-07-09 10:44 · Score: 1

You could probably do that with a ground effect plane. Though it would be somewhat unnerving to have one pass above your car.

--
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Re:Ok... by trout007 · 2012-07-09 12:34 · Score: 2

If I had my choice I would want all airplanes to be 2x2. No middle seats is my dream because I'm always next to someone spilling over their armrest.
The only problem with air travel is the TSA. In the old days you could just show up 20 minutes before a flight and walk through a metal detector set to only detect handguns 9mm or larger and be on your way. These days it's easier to drive unless nature put an ocean in your way.
Air travel is the best method of long distance travel because there is a network effect. If you build a new airport somewhere it is instantly connected to every airport that an aircraft can reach from there. There is plenty of air space to route flights around with the exception of some cities and even there it can be improved with better tech.
Trains are great for commuting into or between cities where you don't need a car. Florida was going to put a high speed rail from Orlando to Tampa but it doesn't make sense. You can't get around either city without a car and they are only an hour and a half apart driving. It will be cheaper and easier to just drive. I used to live in NJ and it was nice taking a train into NYC since it's hard to drive there and expensive to park.

--
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
Re:Ok... by hackertourist · 2012-07-09 20:50 · Score: 1

Dedicated roadways! You know, like the ones trains run on, sans rails. So, not all that different after all (light rail actually wins out on this one, thanks to the ability to actually attach the vehicle to the infrastructure...)
Actually, the bus only needs dedicated roadways for high-speed sections. It can merge into normal traffic (or existing bus lanes) in cities.
Part of the concept is that the bus has no fixed route. This is impossible with a rail vehicle.
As for attaching the vehicle to the infrastructure: not really. A train is constrained in only one dimension, by flanges that are a couple of cm high. A roadway with guard rails on either side offers more protection.
The Superbus is a concept that might work in areas where a high-speed train is uneconomical.
Re:Ok... by rasmusbr · 2012-07-09 22:40 · Score: 1

It will work great as long as the dedicated high speed road provides sufficient grip to turn corners (however slight) at those speeds. It's not a coincidence that this system is intended to (possibly) be launched in a desert country with no winter and no rain to speak of.
I think the future of cross country bus travel is going to be self-driving buses that travel at the same speeds as today, but with lower per mile costs. The buses will probably have 3-abreast seating and more legroom at roughly the same ticket prices as today's 4-abreast buses.
Side point: The electric car is also a technology from the 1800's.
Re:Ok... by CanHasDIY · 2012-07-10 01:57 · Score: 1

Dedicated roadways! You know, like the ones trains run on, sans rails. So, not all that different after all (light rail actually wins out on this one, thanks to the ability to actually attach the vehicle to the infrastructure...)
Actually, the bus only needs dedicated roadways for high-speed sections. It can merge into normal traffic (or existing bus lanes) in cities. Part of the concept is that the bus has no fixed route. This is impossible with a rail vehicle.
Yea, I know the CGI videos on their website show the lenghty beast easily slipping in and out of tight city streets with zero regard to physics, but I find the idea highly unrealistic. Ever see a stretch limo attempt to navigate a roundabout? Funny to watch, nigh impossible if you're the driver.

Here's another flaw in the plan: The concept is for more of an up-scale, private limo service than a traditional bus, right? Okay, so we know the only people riding will be the well off - the question becomes, who pays for the construction of these dedicated, "elite" superhighways? The general public, for whom the privilege of travelling on the roads they paid for would be non-existent?

I certainly wouldn't approve of my tax monies being spent on playthings for the rich-and-famous. Would you?

--
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Re:Ok... by Cimexus · 2012-07-10 02:35 · Score: 1

Yeah flying in the US is a bit of a pain these days I have to admit (I visit the US regularly so do know what you mean).
I'm thankful at home (Australia) things are still pretty quick and easy, for domestic flights at least. 20 minutes is pushing it, but I usually turn up only 30-40 minutes before domestic flights here in Australia and have never missed one (if you're checking bags, 30 minutes before departure is the cutoff, but it's only 15 minutes before if you are only taking carry-on luggage).
The reasons I can do this are:
1. Security is still just a simple metal detector here. You don't need to take off shoes. There are no liquids restrictions.
2, I usually fly Qantas and have a frequent flier card and RFID bag tags. This means there's no standing in lines to check in - I just tap my card on one of the little readers they have at the front of the airport, a light turns green and it says "you are checked in". They don't even give you a boarding pass anymore - you just tap your card again at the gate. Checked bags are similarly easy - walk to one of the bag drop machines and it scans the RFID tag, knows who you are and what flight you're checked in for, and away it goes on the conveyor belt. Takes about 20 seconds.
So I still love flying domestically. It's quick, easy and convenient.
International flights are a bit more involved - can't use the automatic check-in for that, and because some international flights are obviously to the US, they enforce the US liquid/gel restrictions. You'll also sometimes get an extra pat down/security screening at the gate for US-bound flights. Still don't have to remove shoes though thankfully!
Re:Ok... by jasno · 2012-07-10 07:43 · Score: 1

I know, right? Trickle-down never works... which is why my in-laws who live below the poverty line had access to free, advanced medical care and drive a second-hand prius... oh and HDTVs... cell phones... all the food they can eat... yeah.. never works.

--

http://www.masturbateforpeace.com/

Seems like an interesting idea by GodfatherofSoul · 2012-07-09 07:49 · Score: 1

With all of these 21st century ultra-highspeed rail systems, would an approach like this with dedicated tracks or roads work better?

--
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!

Re:(or 192 mph) by uncanny · 2012-07-09 07:50 · Score: 1

Significant digits, motherfucker! Do you know them?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significant_figures
do you?

The bad news by GameboyRMH · 2012-07-09 07:50 · Score: 1

It still smells like pee and has uncomfortable seats.

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel

Re:The bad news by Hal_Porter · 2012-07-09 10:47 · Score: 1

The man opposite you has a T shirt that says "I AM A MOTHERFUCKER"
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/epic-beard-man

--
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;

Re:(or 192 mph) by Baloroth · 2012-07-09 07:50 · Score: 1

300km/h is almost exactly 186 mph, not 192 mph, so methinks OP has a point of some kind (not 100% sure what it is, though).

--
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton

Yet another "supercar". by Animats · 2012-07-09 07:50 · Score: 2

OK, somebody built a stretch-limo electric supercar. Those are fun, but not too useful. A stretch-limo version of a Ferrari has been built.

The dual rear axles steer, so the turning circle is reasonable. (Many tour buses have that feature.) The limited ground clearance is going to be a problem on a long vehicle. It would have trouble with many driveways and all speed bumps. They should have put in a suspension that allows lifting the vehicle when necessary.

The demo vehicle has lead-acid batteries and limited range. The designer talks about going to a more advanced battery technology. They also talk about battery swapping, but they'd need a network of battery-swap stations sized for this thing.

Re:Yet another "supercar". by Eric+S.+Smith · 2012-07-09 08:31 · Score: 1

Batteries make about as much sense as the rest of the concept — gimmicky car is gimmicky.

--
Mind the Gap
Re:Yet another "supercar". by amorsen · 2012-07-09 08:33 · Score: 2

If you have to upgrade infrastructure anyways then there's got to be a better way to do it from top to bottom then a stretch-limo Lamborghini look-a-like
Is there? You need it to be light per-passenger because you don't have low rolling resistance of rail, so you can't afford the waste of floor space in trains (aisles etc.). You need it to be stable because you don't have the secure catch offered by rail, so it needs to be quite low and can't look like a bus.

--
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?

Hopeless project by EdwinV · 2012-07-09 07:51 · Score: 2

I probably know a little bit more about this thing than most and most of it is not good. Usually when trying something new, you'd expect people to try and prove the concept before doing anything really expensive. Here it was the other way around. Most of the effort was put into making a flashy prototype with all the bells and whistles in place. Really, worrying about where to mount the LCD displays? The result is a machine that incredibly expensive with no chance of commercialisation because litterally every part it contains is different. The things that were important, like aerodynamics and structural reliability have enough left over issues for anybody involved in the design to not want to be in it when it drives full speed. It it ever will. I suppose this is what you get when you hand over pretty much unlimited funding to people that have little interest in the actual science.

Speed is irrelevant by fiannaFailMan · 2012-07-09 07:57 · Score: 4, Interesting

The speed of mass transit solutions is often irrelevant unless you're talking about ~300 mile trips where High Speed Rail becomes competitive with air travel. A much bigger factor is frequency. If you have to wait 15 minutes at a stop rather than 30 minutes then that shaves a considerable amount of time off your journey without resorting to unsafe velocities. When you see a tram with an aerodynamic front puttering along the street at 20MPH then you know that the aero front was all for show and had more to do with securing funding than actually improving performance. I suspect that the advertised top speed of this 'bus' has more to do with getting publicity and investor attention than anything that's likely to see service. Even on a German autobahn I wouldn't want to be sitting on a bus that goes faster than 70MPH.

That said, journey time alone is not the only factor in mass transit. Comfort and convenience are a big deal. I know I'd rather have a nap or read a book or get some work done than have to focus on driving.

Some of the routing ideas mentioned in the project's website are worth a closer look. Some interesting concepts in there.

--
Drill baby drill - on Mars

Re:Speed is irrelevant by PPH · 2012-07-09 08:27 · Score: 2

When you see a tram with an aerodynamic front puttering along the street at 20MPH then you know that the aero front was all for show
Nope. There is a reason for that smooth, sloped nose. Idaho Stops.

--
Have gnu, will travel.
Re:Speed is irrelevant by fiannaFailMan · 2012-07-09 09:11 · Score: 1

When you see a tram with an aerodynamic front puttering along the street at 20MPH then you know that the aero front was all for show
Nope. There is a reason for that smooth, sloped nose. Idaho Stops.
Huh? What's that got to do with the price of fish?

--
Drill baby drill - on Mars
Re:Speed is irrelevant by xaxa · 2012-07-09 11:35 · Score: 1

The speed of mass transit solutions is often irrelevant unless you're talking about ~300 mile trips where High Speed Rail becomes competitive with air travel.
Not long ago Transport for London were advertising that on the Victoria Line "the new [signalling] system will be fully in use by the end of 2012, allowing up to 33 trains per hour instead of 27. This in combination with the new, faster trains will increase the line's capacity overall by 21%" (from Wikipedia, though the upgrade is now complete).
If I've calculated that correctly, that means 12 seconds less waiting time on average, plus a faster journey. I think each train can carry ~1400 people (1200 standing, 200 seated).
However, I think the improvement is probably more to do with acceleration (and deceleration) than top speed, but top speed is important too -- for journeys under 300 miles it helps to compete with road travel.
Re:Speed is irrelevant by greg_barton · 2012-07-09 12:30 · Score: 1

That touches on the biggest liability: drivers. If something like this became commonplace would you want someone with the skill of your average bus driver zipping along at 120mph holding your life in their hands?

I smell another "Speed" movie... by purpledinoz · 2012-07-09 07:59 · Score: 2

Does anyone else fear that this will be an excuse to make another "Speed" movie?

Re:I smell another "Speed" movie... by Joe_Dragon · 2012-07-09 08:18 · Score: 1

I have a idea let push the bus to 250MPH and drain the batterys so the bomb has no power to fire.

Dumb. by LoudMusic · 2012-07-09 08:02 · Score: 1

I like electric vehicles a lot. I think they have a lot of potential. But this is just dumb.

--
No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!

Re:Lots of space in the Arabian Desert by vlm · 2012-07-09 08:08 · Score: 2

From personal experience the best way to use a bus is to drive from drinking establishment to drinking establishment, and those are few and far between in the kingdom of S.A. .. at least officially. Now in Germany where the small villages are spaced roughly 10 kilotons apart, we could go pub hopping almost faster than a bathroom break at 300 KPH.

Maybe sightseeing tours, where you can go from vegas to the hoover dam in minutes?

--
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger

I eagerly await ... by PPH · 2012-07-09 08:19 · Score: 1

... its debut here.

--
Have gnu, will travel.

Heh by SandFrog · 2012-07-09 08:20 · Score: 1

heh, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074205/

--
Contentment is the greatest wealth
- Sukhavagga Dhammapada
Contentment is the goal behind all goals.

god the 70's had some AWFUL movies by Thud457 · 2012-07-09 08:33 · Score: 4, Funny

If it's not atomic powered and can change tires automatically, I'm not riding in that deathtrap!

--

the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

Re:god the 70's had some AWFUL movies by Hal_Porter · 2012-07-09 10:13 · Score: 1

I remember this film
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Bus

--
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Re:god the 70's had some AWFUL movies by Ginger+Unicorn · 2012-07-09 23:07 · Score: 1

Yup, that was exactly what I was looking for. Used to have it taped off the telly in the very early 80's when I was about 6. I watched it again in my early 20's and remember finding the smashed off milk carton joke quite hilarious

--
(1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons

Re:(or 192 mph) by Anne_Nonymous · 2012-07-09 08:34 · Score: 1

>> methinks OP has a point of some kind (not 100% sure what it is, though)

Well it's obviously not a decimal point.

Looks like a great transport from LA to Vegas by K8Fan · 2012-07-09 08:34 · Score: 2

The world's fastest limo! At that kind of speed, it might be the fastest way from LA to Las Vegas, if you count all the airport security, baggage, etc.

This is the school bus that Bruce Wayne used to ride.

--
"How perfectly Goddamn delightful it all is, to be sure" Charles Crumb

Re:Lots of space in the Arabian Desert by 91degrees · 2012-07-09 08:35 · Score: 1

It could work as a sort of low cost low capacity high speed rail. While the cost of high speed road is comparable to that of high speed rail, roads can also be used by ordinary cars.

I think you're right. Could be a demand for this in the middle East, where there are plenty of people with fast cars. Have a dedicated lane with a minimum speed limit, and go from Riyadh to Jedah in 3 and a half hours.

Does it come with a spare tire? by HockeyPuck · 2012-07-09 08:47 · Score: 3, Insightful

I found the limitations a bit much:

200km range... or about 124 miles. Doesn't even get you from San Francisco to LA. Even if it only takes you 30minutes to get there, you're only saving about an hour. And this would required dedicated infrastructure/roads. Not exactly easy given that our highways are already crowded.

Does it come with a spare? I realize that Greyhound buses have the same problem, but those buses a) carry many more people per trip and b) the company has a much better infrastructure for dealing with broken down buses. Plus the buses have no problems going over curbs, parking lot entrances etc..

Where do you store luggage? Do you hold your bags on your lap?

Looks like a stretch Ferrari. Interesting yes, practical no.

Have I heard of Superbus? by glwtta · 2012-07-09 08:52 · Score: 2

They're like a French No Doubt, right?

--
sic transit gloria mundi

Already Been Done by sociocapitalist · 2012-07-09 08:54 · Score: 1

Been in planning for awhile in the US: http://www.theonion.com/video/obama-replaces-costly-highspeed-rail-plan-with-hig,18473/

(and yes, I know it's a spoof)

--
blindly antisocialist = antisocial

Re:Already Been Done by Abstergo · 2012-07-09 15:29 · Score: 1

Highly cost effective ("Buses could be retrofitted and modernized for as little as $40"), and their business class seats are better than you'll find on any airline.
Re:Already Been Done by Anarchduke · 2012-07-09 17:31 · Score: 1

not the only spoof http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074205/

--
who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain

300kph? Nice! But... by sootman · 2012-07-09 08:59 · Score: 1

at what speed do buses start getting seatbelts?

--
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.

Re:300kph? Nice! But... by RailRide · 2012-07-10 03:51 · Score: 1

Greyhound's newest coaches already have seat belts: (as well as a number of smaller, though probably affiliated carriers)
I've even ridden these NYC-Montreal through the notorious Adirondack Northway, but haven't felt any need to use the seat belts. The cupholder, power outlets and WiFi, however...
--PCJ

Oblig. by FatLittleMonkey · 2012-07-09 09:21 · Score: 1

what's with the link to some advert-laden page-view magnet

The internet has ads?

--
Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.

I actually watched this movie when it premiered... by snooz_crash · 2012-07-09 09:25 · Score: 1

Reminds me of Cyclops in "The Big Bus"

--
ceci n'est pas un sig

Re:Lots of space in the Arabian Desert by vlm · 2012-07-09 09:50 · Score: 2

I didn't think Germany measured distances in small nukes also.

Old .mil saying I heard a long time ago. There's a lot of variations but they all rely on you wanna be at least a KM away per KT at least for small values of KT. Once you get up to 100 or so the linear scaling breaks down pretty badly. Or another way to put it is if there's a grid of cities 10 KM apart you're wasting valuable fissionables if you hit each with more than 10 KT or so since that would be about the right value to relatively evenly toast an area. Dropping multiple 9 MT on a 10KM grid would be a bit excessive...

Its an old .mil saying because the assumption was because .ru overpowered us about 10 to 1, the forces in Germany would pretty much be a speed bump during an invasion until the NCA got around to releasing the nukes, at which point things get pretty messy.

--
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger

No creds by PGC · 2012-07-09 09:55 · Score: 1

No credits to Wubbo Ockels, the Dutch astronaut who has been pushing this project for years?

Just some marketing talk about Saudi's...

--
The Dutch will inherit the earth. If not, we'll settle for a bit of ocean. Beta delenda est!

Intercity by DrYak · 2012-07-09 12:39 · Score: 1

The limited ground clearance is going to be a problem on a long vehicle. It would have trouble with many driveways and all speed bumps. They should have put in a suspension that allows lifting the vehicle when necessary.

Given the expected top range (~200km) and the planned top speed (up to 300km/h) I think that this system, if it sees deployment, would be better suited for inter-city travel, rather than intra-city.
Thus it needs less emphasis on being able to drive inside a city and its various problems (speed bumps, etc.), and more emphasis in being able to travel on the high-way between cities.

The demo vehicle has lead-acid batteries and limited range. The designer talks about going to a more advanced battery technology. They also talk about battery swapping, but they'd need a network of battery-swap stations sized for this thing.

Well, you're also going to need a network of bus stations anyway (one in each city along the route, prefeabily located not too far from the highway, and easily accessible with the city public transportation system or easy to park next to it). So the stop at one city's station would be the perfect opportunity to swap batteries, while poeple embark/disembark the bus.

All in all, it looks like a nice solution for regions (like the USA and unlike most of europe) lacking a well developped and connected rail network.
Best of all, it could already start driving on current highway although at a safer top speed, and slowly start adding additionnal dedicated high-speed lanes progressively on the highways.
(A little bit like the high speed rail network was developped in some european countries: First have the long distance trains run slower on the same tracks, then progressively build additionnal rail track better suited for the high speed trains).

--
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]

Re:(or 192 mph) by chrismcb · 2012-07-09 12:51 · Score: 1

TFA also says "nearly 300 km/h" which implies 1 significant digit.

Ah, forget that bus, I want this one... by axlr8or · 2012-07-09 14:49 · Score: 1

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075909/ Imagination.

I've seen this somewhere before... by Anarchduke · 2012-07-09 17:29 · Score: 1

Wow someone made a really Big Bus!!!

--
who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain

Re:I've seen this somewhere before... by RailRide · 2012-07-10 04:35 · Score: 1

Not only that, but someone managed to find and preserve scans of an article on its construction: http://forums.finalgear.com/general-automotive/awesome-thread-automotive-edition-34036/page-131/
Unfortunately it seems the real "Big Bus" was scrapped. Maybe some goofy automotive-reality show could attempt to re-create the thing.
---PCJ

Rail needs either distance or population density by tlambert · 2012-07-09 18:15 · Score: 1

Rail needs either distance or population density to be economically viable. Given that 50% of the U.S. population lives within 50 miles of a coast, yeah, it works in densely populated areas, but for example the rail in the middle of nowhere they plan here in California isn't going to see a lot of ridership.

Even if it's economically viable, it does give a nice single choke-point where people without individual transport can have their mobility drastically reduced if someone in power thinks it's in their best interests to shut peoples travel down. We've several dry runs for this already, for example on the airport closures after 9/11, or the closure of the only two roads in and out of New Orleans to only emergency traffic, effectively forcing 60,000 people to stay put in flood conditions, or the BART shutdown of cell service in an attempt to squelch civil disobedience.

Road by bef · 2012-07-09 21:10 · Score: 1

You'd need a dedicated road for this. Might as well build a train.

Stockard Channing by boristdog · 2012-07-10 02:23 · Score: 1

As long as Stockard Channing is aboard, I'll be there.

RAISE THE FLAGS OF ALL NATIONS!

Break Wind by turgid · 2012-07-10 08:21 · Score: 1

How fast does it have to go to break wind?

--
Stick Men

Top Gear by DarthVain · 2012-07-11 08:16 · Score: 1

Am I the only one that wants to see the Stig take that thing through the hammerhead?

121 of 180 comments (clear)