Tesla semi

[tomato coupe]

Kind of like jet travel getting faster? We're all still stuck at .9 Mach, just like the 707 days.

Irrelevant. We're at mach .9 because people don't like the noise of supersonic aircraft.

 

[houstonscott]

Irrelevant. We're at mach .9 because people don't like the noise of supersonic aircraft.

Waiting on the discovery of silent flight technology, It will come. Right?

 

[tomato coupe]

Waiting on the discovery of silent flight technology, It will come. Right?

I don't know. Are people clamoring for silent supersonic flight? It seems to me people made a collective decision that the benefits of supersonic travel do not outweigh the "costs."

 

[buickanddeere]

I don't know. Are people clamoring for silent supersonic flight? It seems to me people made a collective decision that the benefits of supersonic travel do not outweigh the "costs."

What is your background and education? Ask an engineer and they will tell you that any tech has an absolute limit, a maximum possible limit and limit that is a bell curve with the best performance per dollar per time per reliability and per safety .
This is why the Concord was parked . This is why the US still flys the U2 instead of the ST-71. Even the super duper B2 is sub Sonic and the F35 is subsonic with the ability to briefly sprint super sonic.
It is why the best efficiency for an internal combustion reciprocating diesel is approx 50% and that is compound with exhaust heat extraction. Try to tell people that the 200mpg carburetor does not exist and they will fight you to the death because they want to believe they can have it and save money . And they believe oil companies are villains hiding the 200mpg carb. Take a look at the btu’s in a gallon of gasoline and tell us how 200mpg is possible . Same analogy for battery storage .

 

[houstonscott]

What is your background and education? Ask an engineer and they will tell you that any tech has an absolute limit, a maximum possible limit and limit that is a bell curve with the best performance per dollar per time per reliability and per safety . This is why the Concord was parked . This is why the US still flys the U2 instead of the ST-71. Even the super duper B2 is sub Sonic and the F35 is subsonic with the ability to briefly sprint super sonic. It is why the best efficiency for an internal combustion reciprocating diesel is approx 50% and that is compound with exhaust heat extraction. Try to tell people that the 200mpg carburetor does not exist and they will fight you to the death because they want to believe they can have it and save money . And they believe oil companies are villains hiding the 200mpg carb. Take a look at the btu’s in a gallon of gasoline and tell us how 200mpg is possible . Same analogy for battery storage .

I don't think tomato has realized I'm letting him make my case, he still doesn't see it...

 

[vvanders]

Buick, you never did say if you wanted to walk back your claim of data speeds increasing 10x or not in the next 10 years.

You has such a succinct explanation of how this massive technical achievement was going to be made I'd hate to see you not follow through.

 

[two_bit_score]

I don't think tomato has realized I'm letting him make my case, he still doesn't see it...

Do you mean tomatoe?

 

[tomato coupe]

This is why the Concord was parked . This is why the US still flys the U2 instead of the ST-71. Even the super duper B2 is sub Sonic and the F35 is subsonic with the ability to briefly sprint super sonic.

All this discussion of supersonic planes is irrelevant. The Concord was parked because it was not profitable, given the (non scientific) restrictions placed on it. The B2 flies sub-sonic because of its stealth requirements. The SR-71 was retired largely for political reasons.

It is why the best efficiency for an internal combustion reciprocating diesel is approx 50% and that is compound with exhaust heat extraction.

Try to tell people that the 200mpg carburetor does not exist and they will fight you to the death because they want to believe they can have it and save money . And they believe oil companies are villains hiding the 200mpg carb. Take a look at the btu in a gallon of gasoline and tell us how 200mpg is possible . Same analogy for battery storage .

You and HS continue to make the argument that the ultimate capabilities of batteries are limited because present technology imposes these limitations. It's very shortsighted to assume that new technology will not be developed / discovered in the future that will increase the capabilities of batteries. You, in particular, keep arguing that the laws of physics prevent further improvements in battery capabilities. This is simply an untrue statement. Physics does not say that the energy density of batteries cannot meet or exceed the energy density of fossil fuels, only that you cannot do it with present battery technology.

What is your background and education? Ask an engineer and they will tell you that any tech has an absolute limit, a maximum possible limit and limit that is a bell curve with the best performance per dollar per time per reliability and per safety.

My background and education? I have a PhD in experimental physics, and undergraduate degrees in applied mathematics and electrical engineering. I founded and presently own a company that manufactures scientific equipment. I have a pretty good grasp of what the laws of physics say, and what they do not say.

 

[houstonscott]

All this discussion of supersonic planes is irrelevant. The Concord was parked because it was not profitable, given the (non scientific) restrictions placed on it. The B2 flies sub-sonic because of its stealth requirements. The SR-71 was retired largely for political reasons. You and HS continue to make the argument that the ultimate capabilities of batteries are limited because present technology imposes these limitations. It's very shortsighted to assume that new technology will not be developed / discovered in the future that will increase the capabilities of batteries. You, in particular, keep arguing that the laws of physics prevent further improvements in battery capabilities. This is simply an untrue statement. Physics does not say that the energy density of batteries cannot meet or exceed the energy density of fossil fuels, only that you cannot do it with present battery technology. My background and education? I have a PhD in experimental physics, and undergraduate degrees in applied mathematics and electrical engineering. I founded and presently own a company that manufactures scientific equipment. I have a pretty good grasp of what the laws of physics say, and what they do not say.

Going to be a lot of old PhD's with a classic old Tesla in the barn someday, waiting for the break through. You can park it next to the Honda Insight. Lol.

 

[tomato coupe]

Going to be a lot of old PhD's with a classic old Tesla in the barn someday, waiting for the break through. You can park it next to the Honda Insight. Lol.

I don't own a Tesla. Or an Insight.