SuperTruck hauls goods, sips fuel

[elhigh]

Originally Posted by aerohead

It cost each man,woman,and child in the USA 36-cents to finance the govt. portion.

The per-individual cost isn't the issue, the fact that the total price tag is as big as it is, is the issue. Paring the per-person costs down to make them look small is how the government keeps spending such tremendous amounts of money, denouncing the expenditures as mere drops in each of our buckets. My point is that that drop, like so many others, could have been much smaller or even non-existent.

You have yourself posted photos of NASA's aeromodding experiments, there's the Bullet Truck to draw examples from, and of course Luigi Colani's body of work is out there. There's an awful lot of information on the whole topic already available, an awful lot of work has already been done, and this study group went and did it again. If that's how they economize effort and brains, is it any wonder they didn't do as well as an independent research group has already done? An independent research group with a budget only a fraction of the size, I might add.

It isn't that we, each American citizen, got ripped off to the tune of 36 cents. It's that we, the American tax base, got a piss-poor return for our $115 million dollars.

[freebeard]

Yeah, I want to see a grudge match between the Supertruck and a Colani.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by elhigh

The per-individual cost isn't the issue, the fact that the total price tag is as big as it is, is the issue. Paring the per-person costs down to make them look small is how the government keeps spending such tremendous amounts of money, denouncing the expenditures as mere drops in each of our buckets. My point is that that drop, like so many others, could have been much smaller or even non-existent.

You have yourself posted photos of NASA's aeromodding experiments, there's the Bullet Truck to draw examples from, and of course Luigi Colani's body of work is out there. There's an awful lot of information on the whole topic already available, an awful lot of work has already been done, and this study group went and did it again. If that's how they economize effort and brains, is it any wonder they didn't do as well as an independent research group has already done? An independent research group with a budget only a fraction of the size, I might add.

It isn't that we, each American citizen, got ripped off to the tune of 36 cents. It's that we, the American tax base, got a piss-poor return for our $115 million dollars.

So at 23-million a year we got:
*115% mpg improvement instead of 50%
*Hybrid
*Hermetic AC
*Waste heat recovery-electric generation
*Photovoltaic power augmentation
*Active telemetry/transmission,smart-shifting
*Active aerodynamics
*Active suspension
*Custom chassis
*Exotic lightweight materials
*Smart steering
I'm no manufacturing engineer,but this seems like a bargain to me.One international space station toilet/year.
Some automakers spend $ 2-billion on advertising each year which doesn't do me any good.That's $ 10-billion over the same period.
I'm excited to drop 36-cents if it means getting the USA off imported oil.
If it gets my air within the Clean Air Act standards,my annual inspection fee will be $12 instead of $39.50.That's worth more than $115-million right there.

[Bicycle Bob]

To me, the big news on this item is breaking 50% thermal efficiency on the road. That used to be the province of ship's diesels.
Has anybody seen a picture of the back end, or the detailing between tractor and trailer?

[bikeprof]

Trucking is as advanced a Barney or Fred were back in those days...
Still pushing the same(but somewhat better machines), down the road.

I'm ALL for improvement but there are sooo many factors involved and the #1 here is:
Owner/driver of the equipment.

Change a bulb, not much light difference is noted BUT change a mind and MANY things can be done.
For instance the "super singles"; better FE, less maintenance, tracking and turning performance, etc... and how have they been accepted. Not too well...

Hybrid buses are flowing every day in most cities here in the USA, why not some 18 wheelers, hmmm?

[tvbd56]

Originally Posted by bikeprof

Trucking is as advanced a Barney or Fred were back in those days...
Still pushing the same(but somewhat better machines), down the road.

I'm ALL for improvement but there are sooo many factors involved and the #1 here is:
Owner/driver of the equipment.

Change a bulb, not much light difference is noted BUT change a mind and MANY things can be done.
For instance the "super singles"; better FE, less maintenance, tracking and turning performance, etc... and how have they been accepted. Not too well...

Hybrid buses are flowing every day in most cities here in the USA, why not some 18 wheelers, hmmm?

My assumption is that most 18wheelers are owned by a company or by an individual owner. Which they aren't willing to get out the 6-figure checkbook for whole/partial hybrid 18wheeler fleet or even just one hybrid 18wheeler when they have a whole fleet of diesels that work just fine.

And with the buses, I'm sure that most of the bus companies have deals with the state/county/city where they get a large amount of their funding from. Then these bus companies ask for more money from the state/county/city (s) so they can get a full/partial hybrid fleet. Which, as was mentioned earlier, is $900k but is "only" 15 cents per person of tax increases (Not real numbers).
And now the state/county/city can go flaunt around saying that their buses are hybrid and make themselves look better... AT OUR COST.

Don't get me wrong, I see the buses here in Sacramento have been transferring over to natural gas from gasoline or diesel. Even a number of them are a natural gas hybrid, and are really comfy on the inside! The bus and light rail are really convenient and is easy for me at all times because i pay for a commuter pass with my college tuition.

[wdb]

Originally Posted by Bicycle Bob

To me, the big news on this item is breaking 50% thermal efficiency on the road. That used to be the province of ship's diesels.
Has anybody seen a picture of the back end, or the detailing between tractor and trailer?

Freightliner SuperTruck has a lot more details but it is so loaded with gimmickry that its driving my aging pooter a bit bonky. It does mention camera mirrors. The images I've managed to load also suggest that the back of the trailer has rounded corners.

EDIT: I got one of the videos to run. The back of the cab is very conventional. It appears as though the magic is in the fairings, and perhaps the front surface of the trailer.

ANOTEHR EDIT: Oh wow, now they're saying that over 2/3 of the improvement in fuel economy came from the trailer! Talk about bang for buck...

FINAL EDIT, I PROMISE: Found an image of the back of the trailer. It has the foldout extensions very much like I've seen on trucks around here. It also says the fairings on the cab between the cab and trailer are 'articulating', which implies that they move in response to some input or another.

[bikeprof]

As you know, the trailer is 8O% of the combination. LOTS of damage to the air is created by the tail end, so..., if we were to improve the tail end and create flowing instead of waterfalling, then the FUEL(in this case, FUEL/Diesel) economy would be GREAT!

I'm not going into description but many items can be done to improve the air CHAOS out of the back end.

I drove a truck,(owned few trucks), and I would try to keep the Diesel MPG's at about 7.57+(real figures) to an all time high(3 trips loaded), at 9.40 !
Mind you, '00 Freightliner Century/500 Cummins/10SP & 48' Flatbed spread, net combination lbs: 32,000+/- ~78,500 loaded
Without any MODS 'cept the nut behind the wheel.
Good stuff can come out of want and some technology :-)))))

[Xist]

Originally Posted by wdb

driving my aging pooter a bit bonky.

Disabling javascript prevents many undesirables from loading.

[elhigh]

I'd like to see mandated fuel economy standards for heavy trucks. Then we'll see manufacturers pushing hard with what they already know how to do, but don't.