The 300 km/h Superbus 180
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.'"
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! (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.
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Ok... (Score:5, 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, [superbusproject.com] 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...)
Re:It's SENSATIONAL! But also kind of BORING! (Score:4, 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.
Does it come with a spare tire? (Score:4, 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.