The 300 km/h Superbus

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by samzenpus on Monday July 9, 2012 @07:30AM from the take-your-super-seat dept.

pigrabbitbear writes "Have you heard of the Superbus? You could have already, as it has been in prototype production for years, and has recently been gaining more attention at auto shows and through public demonstrations. Like a stretch Batmobile that seems yet another triumph for Saudi and Emirate auto enthusiasts, passengers and their entourages enter the car under a row of gull-wings. The bus runs on batteries, and it can fly along at nearly 300 km/h (or 192 mph), and quite 'silently.'"

17 of 180 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

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.
1. 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.
2. 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
3. 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.
4. 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
5. 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!
6. 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.
7. 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
8. 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.
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
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?"
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.
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: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 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?
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
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.