Wow!!!
Getting a little WAY of the track, aren't we!!
1500 hp turbines, 250hp x6 for what? Powering a 30 ton combined unit?
You certainly can do that, but Miss EFFICIENCY will long be gone by then!
Just to come back to some basic road logic:
I don't know if it still exists, but at some time there was regulation that required trucks to have a minimum of 6 or 7 hp per ton of MGW - meaning, that a if you wanted to pull 40 tons all-up weight you needed to have 240hp (or 280hp, don't remember the exact hp), to be allowed to pull the rig.
....and that meant, you where going up the hill at 10-15 km/hr MAX!!
[And for those of us that had a 400 hp rig, it meant to jump on the brakes like mad UPHILL, when we ran into one of those Romanian MAN-copies pulling 42 tons with their wasted 280hp engines at 5-10km/h uphill, where we would haul *** at 100km/h]
Anyway - this was meant to ensure, that a truck would not tackle a hill without enough power even in the lowest gear.
At the end you WILL learn, that you don't need that much power to move with Terraliner...
I suggest you let the ENGINEERS do the math for you, approaching your powerneeds from the NEGATIVE side!
Assemble your worst case scenario for BRAKING - 35 tons all up, steepest incline you want to brake ELECTRICALLY - via the drive-motors.
THIS will give you the GENERATOR size the motors will have to be to hold the rig at speed (and not let it run away) - you up the power a little and still can brake at the worst case scenario or leave it at that and use the friction brakes for the extreme extra.....
[BTW - do NOT use the TELMA brakes in Terraliner!! ....and certainly not 3 of them! It is hard enough to train and hammer the facts into the brain of a truck driver - don't know about recent Telmas, but at my time you had to stay OFF them for AT LEAST 3 min before you stopped and maintain a minimum speed - I think it was 15 km/h....to cool them down, or risk burning the whole truck - I saw quite a few of them - burning! Also, WHY 3 of them if ONE can stop a 42 ton rig?? Also, WHY a Telma if you already use e-motors to re-gen? If you have full batteries you need to burn electric energy, no matter if you get them from a Telma - getting a Iron disc to glow red/yellow hot - or your e-motor/generator, at least here you can pump the juice into a controlled heat -exchanger. IF you feel the need for a retarder, use a HYDRAULIC retarder, VOITH is one.....this one can stand alone - your newest pet company, MAN, integrates them into the drive transmission - no go for the Serial-hybrid...]
Back to the ENGINEERS: Once they have the e-motor/generator size needed for BRAKING, you will quickly see, that this will be MORE than enough for driving needs! Generally your braking performance needs are way bigger than your acceleration/drive needs....
Generally you will NOT get to 100km/h in 110 meters, but you need to brake to 0 from 100km/h in that distance. [Legal stuff]
Now, I don't say you need to be able to do that with e-brake only, most likely that would need e-motors nearly the size of the whole truck - but then a Telma or Voith will also NOT stop you in 110m alone - you will need friction brakes for that to work.
I have NO idea about brake certification on new vehicles. If you have some fail-safe system in your e-motor/generator brake system you might get away with a much smaller (and therefor lighter) friction brake system - as long as you can STOP the machine within legal requirements.
Besides retarders, these days you still use/can use exhaust brakes (in Europe the JAKE brakes are pretty much non-existent), to maintain downhill speeds.
This works on nearly all incline grades - the steeper the grade, the slower you go!! Obviously for the Serial hybrid this is not going to work....
However, it works to provide an idea for the ENGINEERS to figure out HOW MUCH braking ability you want from your e-motor/generator installation.
Personally I would go to the maximum, that is physically possible - at some point the e-motor/generator installation just becomes to big an/or heavy.
In any case - it will be WAY bigger than you need for DRIVE purposes.
[As usually, EVEN if you could maintain a 100 km/h downhill run, you most likely will be stuck behind slower traffic, so you could just accept the fact and design for the slower downhill speeds - which you will see on the same passes you won't be physically able to maintain a high uphill speed - see further down....]
[IF you can trust Wrightspeed data, their 500 hp drive pack can produce 1000 hp re-gen power - so, if true you are right there)
My wild guess is a combined brake power of around 700-800hp. Now reduce the DRIVE -power levels to around 480-500 hp max for the 35-ton max rig and you will be going faster than anything else on the road (....or actually - you will be STUCK behind slower traffic most of the time....)
[I know 26 tons max + 5.5 tons on the trailer - ....I remember when the target weight was 16-18 tons - ....just giving a little space for "spec creep"]
BIO - you need to get a TRUCK Engineer on board and run your numbers.
I don't have the time to check everyone's CV on this thread, but to me it seems none of the guys "doing" actual numbers here are ROAD TRANSPORT engineers (or even just truck drivers) - just doing theoretic numbers, things are getting exciting fast and numbers are through the sky.
Granted, truck builders are getting their numbers up too, with trucks offered in the 700 hp range.
However you need to understand 2 things:
a) there is a worldwide tendency to increase MVGWs (though still nowhere near where you ACTUALLY need that power)
b) today's high power diesels are extremely efficient at 1/3 their nominal power (That is the main reason for the existence of these motors)
You don't NEED 700hp to maintain a 42 ton truck at 85 km/h on ANY of Europe's passes!! Where you WOULD need the 700 hp, you CANNOT maintain the speed for other limitations - mainly road limits like too many and too tight CURVES!
In my short time driving a 520hp -42 ton rig I only ever needed all of those horses ONCE to maintain 90km/h - ...and in this occasion I was overloaded to 44 tons - lower split in 8th gear, engine-rpm scratching yellow and I was at it all of maybe 2 min......before I ran into traffic.
So - there would be no 700+ truck offered on the regular production line, unless weight and efficiency at the 42 ton level, can warrant it.
[Usually these power levels were special orders for Ultra-heavy transport units - 100km/h is like lightspeed for these...never goin' to happen]
At what I get is, that you would be well advised to talk about EFFICIENCY to a road-truck engineer. Ask him about his power suggestions towards a motorhome in your weight goal area. Make it clear, that you need ultimate efficiency numbers - no matter if you finally install the 700 hp engine - you need the numbers that make the rig move in an everyday environment.
At the end, unless you go for the big battery approach, you still need to provide the power from your diesel-gen set.
You want to run on 700 hp - you will be out of Diesel very shortly.
The absolute very best trucks will do about 24l/100km on level ground - using about 240 hp or so....x3 and you see how long your fuel will last...
At the bottom line, you want to save as much weight on parallel systems as possible:
- IF you can brake with the e-motor/generator, why add Telma/Voith systems
- IF a HUGE battery pack can make you drive all day on the battery - WHY install a 700+hp gen-set, IF a 250hp set can recharge you in a few hours AND run the household - your trusted road-truck-ENGINEER will be able to figure the efficiency difference of a heavy battery bank vs. a heavy 700+ gen-set.
You can run a small TOWN on a 500KW gen-set!! A mobile home should be able to do with a little less, no?
Bio - your "design before engineering" is all nice and good - as long as you don't have to bring it to commercial marketing - you can do "Colani"s all day long - ...just there is really NOTHING on the market Colani ever came up with.....
Design what you want, but it would be prudent to crosscheck with the ENGINEERS right away at every step, to check if it is possible at all, at least "just around the corner" - or if you need to wait for the ZERO-Point power module from SG1 to stay on the track you are on.....
The Motorhomes for the rich you showed can all have huge power because - they CAN, money no objection!
If Terralainer goes the same way - well, go for it - it just doesn't seem to fit what is discussed for the last 2000+ posts.....
What I get at, again, there is LOTS of interesting input from all over the place - Ian for one has extremely interesting data - however, what is the PRACTICAL application towards Terraliner?
700+ hp trucks! Great! Does it mean that nowadays you must have 700+ rigs? Maybe, but what are the ACTUAL reasons? It is NOT POWER NEED, it is EFFICIENCY at the needed power level - WHERE do you get that info? Talk to your friends at MAN, IVECO and ANY transport company that uses these rigs!
It is easy to collect data on the net these days (you are a master in that!), but all that info is useless unless you can find the RIGHT context!
Bringing up helicopter turbine power levels is useless - you will NEVER use a helicopter turbine in a road vehicle (except for the odd exotic, like the turbine bike, a master example of everyday uselessness and fuel-inefficiency). How can you find out about this? Ask someone who is in the industry! Mechanic or pilot or designer!
Was it Ian that worked in road planning? Great, very interesting (seriously!)!
Are you planning to "sojourn" on existing and future interstates? Or rather coastal and rural roads?
So - WHY would you need 700+ power to maintain 100km/h on the steepest existing or future interstate if you will mostly be stuck behind slow traffic on rural roads? Might as well design for that and get more efficiency....
Just a sample from a different corner: a TESLA S90D with the "Ludicrous"-up date will out-accelerate about 98% of all existing Supersport cars from 0-60mph. It does it in 2.8 seconds, all you need to do is step on it and hold on to the steering wheel (...well, maybe with the last nav-update you just have to step on it and it will steer itself...). Everything controlled, slip, grip and all.
There is only 11 cars left in the world that - in theory - can MATCH the Tesla, let alone beat it. Mind you the Tesla is a 5 seat (optional 7 seat) SEDAN.
It's lousy to sit in a swoopy Ferrari and KNOW you will get your *** kicked by a SEDAN if you tried....
HOWEVER - this comes at a huge price in efficiency if you use that power.
Even just having the sport version of the S90 will cost you for having bigger motors. [Check the Tesla forums on how range drops when you step on it. Check the Tesla web page for the difference in specs between the models...]
At the end you decide what you want and get, no matter what you really NEED....
thjakits
BTW: You "ENGINE" brake -you don't "TRANSMISSION" brake.......though you might break the transmission....
BTW2: TELMA brakes do NOT produce any usable electric power - they are NOT generators. They produce eddy currents in a spinning Iron disc, which exert then a braking force on the system - the electric power produced is blowing up in heat right at the disc and needs HUGE amounts of cooling to avoid meltdown, literally!!
BTW3: Aviation APUs: the ONLY reason for these is LIGHT weight and generally SHORT/LIMITED time use. They are rather VERY un-efficient from a fuel consumption point of view. They are used because, they generally run only on the ground for short periods. Mainly from boarding until main-engine start and again from main-engine shut down to the end of de-boarding. An un-efficient 25 gallons/hr is still better than 50+ gallons/h for a idling main engine! In some installations it also provides the hot air needed to start the main engines and finally uses the same juice as the main-engines. As soon as these are up and idling the APU is shut down.
Below 300hp there is NO efficient turbine anywhere yet (air, water, road, stationary - compared to diesel) - rational still comes down to weight only. On a truck, that rational is out the window....
And again - AVIATION turbines are NOT rational for road (or any non-aviation) installation. Even the big power plant and marine derivatives of big turbines (30k+ horsepower) are just the core-design, EVERYTHING else around is adapted to the use at hand, mostly with an HUGE increase in infrastructure volume. You may hace space for this on a ship or in a powerplant, not so much in a road vehicle....
Talking about gen-sets. So far you showed specific road vehicle developments (Jalopniks?? etc...) - Why don't you have a look into Industrial power packs with VW/Mercedes/JBC engines (or any other top small diesel producer) - small, light, LOTS of power! Audi is winning LeMans on Diesel engines, ONE of those can supply all you need all the way down to next to nothing.
From my present idea-level, for my ICB I'd go with 2 4/5 cylinder VW diesel-generators and the biggest battery pack I can fit (IF the Aussies can prove their point of 1000km+ on battery only bus tours).....
BTW4: Wrightspeed: They don't give you the ACTUAL fuel consumption numbers! Just a specific scenario in which the OVERALL efficiency comes out on top for the turbine! Garbage truck (and for the smaller vehicles they use delivery trucks), which means LOTS of stop and go, they use pre-charged (from the grid) batteries.
For a classic truck this means LOTS of idling and of course over time a lot of ZERO-miles per gallon. So, their turbine-charge pack comes out better than an idling truck.
I BET you, use a diesel-gen set to re-charge the batteries and you come out BETTER!!
NO mention of long-distance trucking though.....
Love their drive and re-gen motor packs, but the turbine pack is phony - always turns out phony when they avoid actual performance data charts!!
If you use their drive packs and trust their brake numbers you could get as much as 2000 hp brake re-gen for less thna 35 tons GVW!! (...if you put one pack on a single axle on the trailer....). If you park the trailer you still get 1500 brake hp for a 26 ton truck - you are home!! IF it is true.....
A turbine being 10x cleaner than good diesel is also BSx2..... Today's Diesel engines are about as clean as it ever will go.
The recent VW-Skandal just about brings this to the front - today's EPA required emissions are technically NOT obtainable in an efficient manner.
[Never mind VW's cheat software is just too blunt, but Mercedes, Porsche, BMW are on the line too, and their engines are even "dirtier" than the VW, they just don't use an OBVIOUS cheater program. Then - a 50mpg VW is CERTAINLY cleaner and more efficient than any of the road legal "Rolling Coal"-pickups on that continent - never mind all the corporate corruption games in the background 3 ]
BTW5: Sorry, this seems to have been a crosspost from your last post - so some of the stuff above might be redundant...
Getting a little WAY of the track, aren't we!!
1500 hp turbines, 250hp x6 for what? Powering a 30 ton combined unit?
You certainly can do that, but Miss EFFICIENCY will long be gone by then!
Just to come back to some basic road logic:
I don't know if it still exists, but at some time there was regulation that required trucks to have a minimum of 6 or 7 hp per ton of MGW - meaning, that a if you wanted to pull 40 tons all-up weight you needed to have 240hp (or 280hp, don't remember the exact hp), to be allowed to pull the rig.
....and that meant, you where going up the hill at 10-15 km/hr MAX!!
[And for those of us that had a 400 hp rig, it meant to jump on the brakes like mad UPHILL, when we ran into one of those Romanian MAN-copies pulling 42 tons with their wasted 280hp engines at 5-10km/h uphill, where we would haul *** at 100km/h]
Anyway - this was meant to ensure, that a truck would not tackle a hill without enough power even in the lowest gear.
At the end you WILL learn, that you don't need that much power to move with Terraliner...
I suggest you let the ENGINEERS do the math for you, approaching your powerneeds from the NEGATIVE side!
Assemble your worst case scenario for BRAKING - 35 tons all up, steepest incline you want to brake ELECTRICALLY - via the drive-motors.
THIS will give you the GENERATOR size the motors will have to be to hold the rig at speed (and not let it run away) - you up the power a little and still can brake at the worst case scenario or leave it at that and use the friction brakes for the extreme extra.....
[BTW - do NOT use the TELMA brakes in Terraliner!! ....and certainly not 3 of them! It is hard enough to train and hammer the facts into the brain of a truck driver - don't know about recent Telmas, but at my time you had to stay OFF them for AT LEAST 3 min before you stopped and maintain a minimum speed - I think it was 15 km/h....to cool them down, or risk burning the whole truck - I saw quite a few of them - burning! Also, WHY 3 of them if ONE can stop a 42 ton rig?? Also, WHY a Telma if you already use e-motors to re-gen? If you have full batteries you need to burn electric energy, no matter if you get them from a Telma - getting a Iron disc to glow red/yellow hot - or your e-motor/generator, at least here you can pump the juice into a controlled heat -exchanger. IF you feel the need for a retarder, use a HYDRAULIC retarder, VOITH is one.....this one can stand alone - your newest pet company, MAN, integrates them into the drive transmission - no go for the Serial-hybrid...]
Back to the ENGINEERS: Once they have the e-motor/generator size needed for BRAKING, you will quickly see, that this will be MORE than enough for driving needs! Generally your braking performance needs are way bigger than your acceleration/drive needs....
Generally you will NOT get to 100km/h in 110 meters, but you need to brake to 0 from 100km/h in that distance. [Legal stuff]
Now, I don't say you need to be able to do that with e-brake only, most likely that would need e-motors nearly the size of the whole truck - but then a Telma or Voith will also NOT stop you in 110m alone - you will need friction brakes for that to work.
I have NO idea about brake certification on new vehicles. If you have some fail-safe system in your e-motor/generator brake system you might get away with a much smaller (and therefor lighter) friction brake system - as long as you can STOP the machine within legal requirements.
Besides retarders, these days you still use/can use exhaust brakes (in Europe the JAKE brakes are pretty much non-existent), to maintain downhill speeds.
This works on nearly all incline grades - the steeper the grade, the slower you go!! Obviously for the Serial hybrid this is not going to work....
However, it works to provide an idea for the ENGINEERS to figure out HOW MUCH braking ability you want from your e-motor/generator installation.
Personally I would go to the maximum, that is physically possible - at some point the e-motor/generator installation just becomes to big an/or heavy.
In any case - it will be WAY bigger than you need for DRIVE purposes.
[As usually, EVEN if you could maintain a 100 km/h downhill run, you most likely will be stuck behind slower traffic, so you could just accept the fact and design for the slower downhill speeds - which you will see on the same passes you won't be physically able to maintain a high uphill speed - see further down....]
[IF you can trust Wrightspeed data, their 500 hp drive pack can produce 1000 hp re-gen power - so, if true you are right there)
My wild guess is a combined brake power of around 700-800hp. Now reduce the DRIVE -power levels to around 480-500 hp max for the 35-ton max rig and you will be going faster than anything else on the road (....or actually - you will be STUCK behind slower traffic most of the time....)
[I know 26 tons max + 5.5 tons on the trailer - ....I remember when the target weight was 16-18 tons - ....just giving a little space for "spec creep"]
BIO - you need to get a TRUCK Engineer on board and run your numbers.
I don't have the time to check everyone's CV on this thread, but to me it seems none of the guys "doing" actual numbers here are ROAD TRANSPORT engineers (or even just truck drivers) - just doing theoretic numbers, things are getting exciting fast and numbers are through the sky.
Granted, truck builders are getting their numbers up too, with trucks offered in the 700 hp range.
However you need to understand 2 things:
a) there is a worldwide tendency to increase MVGWs (though still nowhere near where you ACTUALLY need that power)
b) today's high power diesels are extremely efficient at 1/3 their nominal power (That is the main reason for the existence of these motors)
You don't NEED 700hp to maintain a 42 ton truck at 85 km/h on ANY of Europe's passes!! Where you WOULD need the 700 hp, you CANNOT maintain the speed for other limitations - mainly road limits like too many and too tight CURVES!
In my short time driving a 520hp -42 ton rig I only ever needed all of those horses ONCE to maintain 90km/h - ...and in this occasion I was overloaded to 44 tons - lower split in 8th gear, engine-rpm scratching yellow and I was at it all of maybe 2 min......before I ran into traffic.
So - there would be no 700+ truck offered on the regular production line, unless weight and efficiency at the 42 ton level, can warrant it.
[Usually these power levels were special orders for Ultra-heavy transport units - 100km/h is like lightspeed for these...never goin' to happen]
At what I get is, that you would be well advised to talk about EFFICIENCY to a road-truck engineer. Ask him about his power suggestions towards a motorhome in your weight goal area. Make it clear, that you need ultimate efficiency numbers - no matter if you finally install the 700 hp engine - you need the numbers that make the rig move in an everyday environment.
At the end, unless you go for the big battery approach, you still need to provide the power from your diesel-gen set.
You want to run on 700 hp - you will be out of Diesel very shortly.
The absolute very best trucks will do about 24l/100km on level ground - using about 240 hp or so....x3 and you see how long your fuel will last...
At the bottom line, you want to save as much weight on parallel systems as possible:
- IF you can brake with the e-motor/generator, why add Telma/Voith systems
- IF a HUGE battery pack can make you drive all day on the battery - WHY install a 700+hp gen-set, IF a 250hp set can recharge you in a few hours AND run the household - your trusted road-truck-ENGINEER will be able to figure the efficiency difference of a heavy battery bank vs. a heavy 700+ gen-set.
You can run a small TOWN on a 500KW gen-set!! A mobile home should be able to do with a little less, no?
Bio - your "design before engineering" is all nice and good - as long as you don't have to bring it to commercial marketing - you can do "Colani"s all day long - ...just there is really NOTHING on the market Colani ever came up with.....
Design what you want, but it would be prudent to crosscheck with the ENGINEERS right away at every step, to check if it is possible at all, at least "just around the corner" - or if you need to wait for the ZERO-Point power module from SG1 to stay on the track you are on.....
The Motorhomes for the rich you showed can all have huge power because - they CAN, money no objection!
If Terralainer goes the same way - well, go for it - it just doesn't seem to fit what is discussed for the last 2000+ posts.....
What I get at, again, there is LOTS of interesting input from all over the place - Ian for one has extremely interesting data - however, what is the PRACTICAL application towards Terraliner?
700+ hp trucks! Great! Does it mean that nowadays you must have 700+ rigs? Maybe, but what are the ACTUAL reasons? It is NOT POWER NEED, it is EFFICIENCY at the needed power level - WHERE do you get that info? Talk to your friends at MAN, IVECO and ANY transport company that uses these rigs!
It is easy to collect data on the net these days (you are a master in that!), but all that info is useless unless you can find the RIGHT context!
Bringing up helicopter turbine power levels is useless - you will NEVER use a helicopter turbine in a road vehicle (except for the odd exotic, like the turbine bike, a master example of everyday uselessness and fuel-inefficiency). How can you find out about this? Ask someone who is in the industry! Mechanic or pilot or designer!
Was it Ian that worked in road planning? Great, very interesting (seriously!)!
Are you planning to "sojourn" on existing and future interstates? Or rather coastal and rural roads?
So - WHY would you need 700+ power to maintain 100km/h on the steepest existing or future interstate if you will mostly be stuck behind slow traffic on rural roads? Might as well design for that and get more efficiency....
Just a sample from a different corner: a TESLA S90D with the "Ludicrous"-up date will out-accelerate about 98% of all existing Supersport cars from 0-60mph. It does it in 2.8 seconds, all you need to do is step on it and hold on to the steering wheel (...well, maybe with the last nav-update you just have to step on it and it will steer itself...). Everything controlled, slip, grip and all.
There is only 11 cars left in the world that - in theory - can MATCH the Tesla, let alone beat it. Mind you the Tesla is a 5 seat (optional 7 seat) SEDAN.
It's lousy to sit in a swoopy Ferrari and KNOW you will get your *** kicked by a SEDAN if you tried....
HOWEVER - this comes at a huge price in efficiency if you use that power.
Even just having the sport version of the S90 will cost you for having bigger motors. [Check the Tesla forums on how range drops when you step on it. Check the Tesla web page for the difference in specs between the models...]
At the end you decide what you want and get, no matter what you really NEED....
thjakits
BTW: You "ENGINE" brake -you don't "TRANSMISSION" brake.......though you might break the transmission....
BTW2: TELMA brakes do NOT produce any usable electric power - they are NOT generators. They produce eddy currents in a spinning Iron disc, which exert then a braking force on the system - the electric power produced is blowing up in heat right at the disc and needs HUGE amounts of cooling to avoid meltdown, literally!!
BTW3: Aviation APUs: the ONLY reason for these is LIGHT weight and generally SHORT/LIMITED time use. They are rather VERY un-efficient from a fuel consumption point of view. They are used because, they generally run only on the ground for short periods. Mainly from boarding until main-engine start and again from main-engine shut down to the end of de-boarding. An un-efficient 25 gallons/hr is still better than 50+ gallons/h for a idling main engine! In some installations it also provides the hot air needed to start the main engines and finally uses the same juice as the main-engines. As soon as these are up and idling the APU is shut down.
Below 300hp there is NO efficient turbine anywhere yet (air, water, road, stationary - compared to diesel) - rational still comes down to weight only. On a truck, that rational is out the window....
And again - AVIATION turbines are NOT rational for road (or any non-aviation) installation. Even the big power plant and marine derivatives of big turbines (30k+ horsepower) are just the core-design, EVERYTHING else around is adapted to the use at hand, mostly with an HUGE increase in infrastructure volume. You may hace space for this on a ship or in a powerplant, not so much in a road vehicle....
Talking about gen-sets. So far you showed specific road vehicle developments (Jalopniks?? etc...) - Why don't you have a look into Industrial power packs with VW/Mercedes/JBC engines (or any other top small diesel producer) - small, light, LOTS of power! Audi is winning LeMans on Diesel engines, ONE of those can supply all you need all the way down to next to nothing.
From my present idea-level, for my ICB I'd go with 2 4/5 cylinder VW diesel-generators and the biggest battery pack I can fit (IF the Aussies can prove their point of 1000km+ on battery only bus tours).....
BTW4: Wrightspeed: They don't give you the ACTUAL fuel consumption numbers! Just a specific scenario in which the OVERALL efficiency comes out on top for the turbine! Garbage truck (and for the smaller vehicles they use delivery trucks), which means LOTS of stop and go, they use pre-charged (from the grid) batteries.
For a classic truck this means LOTS of idling and of course over time a lot of ZERO-miles per gallon. So, their turbine-charge pack comes out better than an idling truck.
I BET you, use a diesel-gen set to re-charge the batteries and you come out BETTER!!
NO mention of long-distance trucking though.....
Love their drive and re-gen motor packs, but the turbine pack is phony - always turns out phony when they avoid actual performance data charts!!
If you use their drive packs and trust their brake numbers you could get as much as 2000 hp brake re-gen for less thna 35 tons GVW!! (...if you put one pack on a single axle on the trailer....). If you park the trailer you still get 1500 brake hp for a 26 ton truck - you are home!! IF it is true.....
A turbine being 10x cleaner than good diesel is also BSx2..... Today's Diesel engines are about as clean as it ever will go.
The recent VW-Skandal just about brings this to the front - today's EPA required emissions are technically NOT obtainable in an efficient manner.
[Never mind VW's cheat software is just too blunt, but Mercedes, Porsche, BMW are on the line too, and their engines are even "dirtier" than the VW, they just don't use an OBVIOUS cheater program. Then - a 50mpg VW is CERTAINLY cleaner and more efficient than any of the road legal "Rolling Coal"-pickups on that continent - never mind all the corporate corruption games in the background 3
]BTW5: Sorry, this seems to have been a crosspost from your last post - so some of the stuff above might be redundant...
Last edited:
