TerraLiner:12 m Globally Mobile Beach House/Class-A Crossover w 6x6 Hybrid Drivetrain
- Thread starter biotect
- Start date
campo
Adventurer
Great Post Biotect
We’d expected nothing else from you !
Hope you’ll one day find the time to send us an invitation for your final Terraliner presentation in London , sure i'd like to come!
.
I've been in close contact and had the possibility to have a ride with some of these vehicles like the Pandur and Pirhana 6x6 as well as the Fennek 4x4 but I here get more knowledge about these recent Russians because they seem to be innovating.
.
Some of my thoughts about all this are
- Why is there for every of these vehicles so different steering and axle positions ?
- The basics for vehicle construction/drawing is weight repartition and nothing else
- If you can combine weight repartition with optimal traction repartition than it’s better
- If you can than bring these 2 in optical balance with the length and size of the vehicle than you have your dream car.
- …
- It’s clear that the Terraliner needs (side) outside extension(s) but what the ******k about your design with medical bathtubs ?
.
Having discussed with some Russians with philosophical knowledge about their army vehicles they tell me that average vehicle life time is much below 50.000km. So these are built for only 50.000km and then fall apart. Philosophy confirmed by US military this week like “Iraqi PM Haider Al-Abadi Says Forces Lost 2,300 Humvees to ISIS” What I mention is very low lifecycle needs.
But Russians are inventive in finding solutions, lots of these guys just replace after the 50.000 km’s with spare parts as engines.
What makes also my opignion the weak point of these super dreamlike hydro suspensions with nice electronic controllers for military war vehicles is that the price to keep them going for more than 50.000km’s will be too high for our world travel vehicle. That’s the only reason why the more basic IS suspension seems to have some advantage (“that incredible Indonesian vehicle from Chuckles”)
.
Go on ! Best regards Campo
We’d expected nothing else from you !
Hope you’ll one day find the time to send us an invitation for your final Terraliner presentation in London , sure i'd like to come!
.
I've been in close contact and had the possibility to have a ride with some of these vehicles like the Pandur and Pirhana 6x6 as well as the Fennek 4x4 but I here get more knowledge about these recent Russians because they seem to be innovating.
.
Some of my thoughts about all this are
- Why is there for every of these vehicles so different steering and axle positions ?
- The basics for vehicle construction/drawing is weight repartition and nothing else
- If you can combine weight repartition with optimal traction repartition than it’s better
- If you can than bring these 2 in optical balance with the length and size of the vehicle than you have your dream car.
- …
- It’s clear that the Terraliner needs (side) outside extension(s) but what the ******k about your design with medical bathtubs ?
.
Having discussed with some Russians with philosophical knowledge about their army vehicles they tell me that average vehicle life time is much below 50.000km. So these are built for only 50.000km and then fall apart. Philosophy confirmed by US military this week like “Iraqi PM Haider Al-Abadi Says Forces Lost 2,300 Humvees to ISIS” What I mention is very low lifecycle needs.
But Russians are inventive in finding solutions, lots of these guys just replace after the 50.000 km’s with spare parts as engines.
What makes also my opignion the weak point of these super dreamlike hydro suspensions with nice electronic controllers for military war vehicles is that the price to keep them going for more than 50.000km’s will be too high for our world travel vehicle. That’s the only reason why the more basic IS suspension seems to have some advantage (“that incredible Indonesian vehicle from Chuckles”)
.
Go on ! Best regards Campo
biotect
Designer
Hey campo,
Glad to see that you are enjoying it! :sombrero:
Still working on it, though; I should have all the posts done in the next 24 hours.
*******************************************
1. The Chinese Six Axle Configuration of the Kamaz Typhoon: Positives? Negatives?
*******************************************
It was a "monster" series of posts, but the Kamaz Typhoon raises so many interesting questions, that it seemed worthwhile to provide a ton of background information and imagery, so that everyone might be brought up to speed.
One of the weirdest things was discovering that the Tatra 813 "Chinese Sixes" that are now so visible at truck trials in Europe, were originally intended as tow trucks!! And not just any kind of tow truck, but "Ballast Tow Trucks": tow trucks that hauled enormous things like missiles and cranes. It's kind of extraordinary that these Tatra 813 Chinese Sixes have now been repurposed to become premiere truck-trial machines; who would have thunk it?
Agreed: the Russians are innovative. The Typhoon is actually not like the standard military transport trucks made by Kamaz, which have conventional axle configurations. When I fill in the remaining blank slots with pages from the current Kamaz military vehicles catalog, this will become readily apparent.
Kamaz deliberately and self-consciously designed the Typhoon to be different. Kamaz went "back to the drawing board", and revived the Chinese Six axle configuration that was more common before the 1960's, at least in certain types of vehicles. So I now really want to know why Kamaz did this. Yes, weight distribution was part of it, but there must have been additional reasons. If anyone understands spoken Russian, and can follow the commentary in the first three videos posted on page 135, post #1344, please let us know if these videos provide some of the answers.....:costumed-smiley-007 See http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...edition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page135 .
In short, there seem to some good reasons to go with a Chinese Six axle configuration for the TerraLiner. But once I am finished with this series about the Typhoon, I would love to hear everyone's thoughts in response to the pages of material posted, and the questions generated. And if anyone ever comes across a good image or a clear video of a Tatra 813 Chinese Six crossing a ditch or a trench, PLEAST POST!! Or even better, a photo or a video of a Kamaz Typhoon crossing a ditch or a trench. That would help settle an important question.
*******************************************
2. Glamping
*******************************************
:hehe::hehe:
The TerraLiner's bathroom is probably the most "patentable" part, at least so far. I was mucking around for many months with more pedestrian bathtub designs, in which the lower half of a shower enclosure does "double duty" as a walk-in bath-tub: the kind of bath-tub that's very compact and vertical, where one sits instead of lying down. But then a "female friend" (let's call her "Sophia", for now.....
), suggested to me,
"Why don't you look into super-innovative, cutting-edge medical bathtubs for hospitals, burn victims, handicapped patients, etc. Who knows what ideas these might inspire!"
Suddenly it became obvious: there is absolutely no reason why a bathtub intended for use in a motorhome needs to stay flat, fixed, and horizontal while not in use. Especially given that hospitals have been rotating, flipping, retracting, and spinning bathtubs for decades. It's kinda obvious in hindsight. When not in use, the space above a fixed, flat, horizontal bathtub in a motorhome is wasted space. So clearly an RV bath-tub must change orientation once one is done bathing. Just wait until I finish posting all the still images that precede the bathtub videos, and you will get the general idea.
Why a bathtub? Well, again, because the TerraLiner will be a "glamper", i.e. a "glamourous camper".
The TerraLiner is intended to push boundaries not just in terms of vehicle tech, but also in terms of the quality of interior amenities -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glamping , http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/glamping , http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/glamper , http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jay-lickus/have-you-ever-been-glamping_b_6841122.html , http://www.theguardian.com/travel/glamping , http://www.theguardian.com/travel/2011/apr/16/camping , and http://www.theguardian.com/travel/2011/apr/16/glamping-camping , https://www.pinterest.com/justdhee/glamping/ , https://it.pinterest.com/christiantse/glamping-airstream-style/ , https://www.pinterest.com/aliceblessing/glamping-and-airstream-ideas/ , https://www.pinterest.com/nika1/travel-trailers-glamping/ , https://www.pinterest.com/su_nanc/glamping/ , https://it.pinterest.com/leciagolden/glamping/ , https://it.pinterest.com/jbmc62/vintage-glamping/ ,and https://it.pinterest.com/equipntrip/glamping-luxury-camping/.
For an extended discussion of "glamping" in this thread, see posts # 216 and #217 on page 22, at http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/threads/124789-Fully-Integrated-MAN-or-TATRA-6x6-or-8x8-Expedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page22
From the very beginning I've signaled my love of all things Airstream, especially the recent Airstream design work done by the British company, American Retro Caravan -- see http://www.arcairstreams.co.uk , http://www.arcairstreams.co.uk/about/what-we-do , http://www.arcairstreams.co.uk/gallery , http://www.arcairstreams.co.uk/refits/leisure-airstreams , https://www.facebook.com/ukairstreams , http://arcairstreams.co.uk/blog/tag/egg-shaped-hole/ , http://arcairstreams.co.uk/blog/2013/02/the-airstream-safari-with-the-egg-shaped-hole/ , http://www.trendhunter.com/trends/american-retro-caravans , and http://www.solidsmack.com/design/american-retro-caravans-a-refresh-on-vintage-airstream-design/:
And so too, I've been unequivocal about my admiration for the work of Christopher C. Deam -- see http://www.cdeam.com , http://www.cdeam.com/projects/discipline/airstream , http://www.cdeam.com/project/bambi , http://www.cdeam.com/project/international , http://www.cdeam.com/project/international-signature-series , http://www.cdeam.com/project/sterling , https://www.facebook.com/pages/Christopher-C-Deam-Design-and-Architecture/150283898325290 , http://www.ted.com/talks/christopher_deam_restyles_the_airstream , https://www.ted.com/talks/christopher_deam_restyles_the_airstream/transcript , and http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/g...s-airstreams-interior-up-to-date-qa.html?_r=0 .
In this thread for Deam's "Bambi" trailer in particular, see posts #316 and #317 on page 32 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page32 . And for videos of Deam's other trailers for AirStream, see post #217 on page 22, at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page22 .
Now, back to finishing that monster series of posts.....
All best wishes,
Biotect
PS -- Once again, many thanks to Nick for letting us all know that the proper name for an axle configuration where two axles locate in tandem up front, and a single axle trails in the rear, is called a "Chinese Six".
Glad to see that you are enjoying it! :sombrero:
Still working on it, though; I should have all the posts done in the next 24 hours.
*******************************************
1. The Chinese Six Axle Configuration of the Kamaz Typhoon: Positives? Negatives?
*******************************************
It was a "monster" series of posts, but the Kamaz Typhoon raises so many interesting questions, that it seemed worthwhile to provide a ton of background information and imagery, so that everyone might be brought up to speed.
One of the weirdest things was discovering that the Tatra 813 "Chinese Sixes" that are now so visible at truck trials in Europe, were originally intended as tow trucks!! And not just any kind of tow truck, but "Ballast Tow Trucks": tow trucks that hauled enormous things like missiles and cranes. It's kind of extraordinary that these Tatra 813 Chinese Sixes have now been repurposed to become premiere truck-trial machines; who would have thunk it?
Agreed: the Russians are innovative. The Typhoon is actually not like the standard military transport trucks made by Kamaz, which have conventional axle configurations. When I fill in the remaining blank slots with pages from the current Kamaz military vehicles catalog, this will become readily apparent.
Kamaz deliberately and self-consciously designed the Typhoon to be different. Kamaz went "back to the drawing board", and revived the Chinese Six axle configuration that was more common before the 1960's, at least in certain types of vehicles. So I now really want to know why Kamaz did this. Yes, weight distribution was part of it, but there must have been additional reasons. If anyone understands spoken Russian, and can follow the commentary in the first three videos posted on page 135, post #1344, please let us know if these videos provide some of the answers.....:costumed-smiley-007 See http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...edition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page135 .
In short, there seem to some good reasons to go with a Chinese Six axle configuration for the TerraLiner. But once I am finished with this series about the Typhoon, I would love to hear everyone's thoughts in response to the pages of material posted, and the questions generated. And if anyone ever comes across a good image or a clear video of a Tatra 813 Chinese Six crossing a ditch or a trench, PLEAST POST!! Or even better, a photo or a video of a Kamaz Typhoon crossing a ditch or a trench. That would help settle an important question.
*******************************************
2. Glamping
*******************************************
:hehe::hehe:
The TerraLiner's bathroom is probably the most "patentable" part, at least so far. I was mucking around for many months with more pedestrian bathtub designs, in which the lower half of a shower enclosure does "double duty" as a walk-in bath-tub: the kind of bath-tub that's very compact and vertical, where one sits instead of lying down. But then a "female friend" (let's call her "Sophia", for now.....
), suggested to me, "Why don't you look into super-innovative, cutting-edge medical bathtubs for hospitals, burn victims, handicapped patients, etc. Who knows what ideas these might inspire!"
Suddenly it became obvious: there is absolutely no reason why a bathtub intended for use in a motorhome needs to stay flat, fixed, and horizontal while not in use. Especially given that hospitals have been rotating, flipping, retracting, and spinning bathtubs for decades. It's kinda obvious in hindsight. When not in use, the space above a fixed, flat, horizontal bathtub in a motorhome is wasted space. So clearly an RV bath-tub must change orientation once one is done bathing. Just wait until I finish posting all the still images that precede the bathtub videos, and you will get the general idea.
Why a bathtub? Well, again, because the TerraLiner will be a "glamper", i.e. a "glamourous camper".
The TerraLiner is intended to push boundaries not just in terms of vehicle tech, but also in terms of the quality of interior amenities -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glamping , http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/glamping , http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/glamper , http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jay-lickus/have-you-ever-been-glamping_b_6841122.html , http://www.theguardian.com/travel/glamping , http://www.theguardian.com/travel/2011/apr/16/camping , and http://www.theguardian.com/travel/2011/apr/16/glamping-camping , https://www.pinterest.com/justdhee/glamping/ , https://it.pinterest.com/christiantse/glamping-airstream-style/ , https://www.pinterest.com/aliceblessing/glamping-and-airstream-ideas/ , https://www.pinterest.com/nika1/travel-trailers-glamping/ , https://www.pinterest.com/su_nanc/glamping/ , https://it.pinterest.com/leciagolden/glamping/ , https://it.pinterest.com/jbmc62/vintage-glamping/ ,and https://it.pinterest.com/equipntrip/glamping-luxury-camping/.
For an extended discussion of "glamping" in this thread, see posts # 216 and #217 on page 22, at http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/threads/124789-Fully-Integrated-MAN-or-TATRA-6x6-or-8x8-Expedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page22
From the very beginning I've signaled my love of all things Airstream, especially the recent Airstream design work done by the British company, American Retro Caravan -- see http://www.arcairstreams.co.uk , http://www.arcairstreams.co.uk/about/what-we-do , http://www.arcairstreams.co.uk/gallery , http://www.arcairstreams.co.uk/refits/leisure-airstreams , https://www.facebook.com/ukairstreams , http://arcairstreams.co.uk/blog/tag/egg-shaped-hole/ , http://arcairstreams.co.uk/blog/2013/02/the-airstream-safari-with-the-egg-shaped-hole/ , http://www.trendhunter.com/trends/american-retro-caravans , and http://www.solidsmack.com/design/american-retro-caravans-a-refresh-on-vintage-airstream-design/:
And so too, I've been unequivocal about my admiration for the work of Christopher C. Deam -- see http://www.cdeam.com , http://www.cdeam.com/projects/discipline/airstream , http://www.cdeam.com/project/bambi , http://www.cdeam.com/project/international , http://www.cdeam.com/project/international-signature-series , http://www.cdeam.com/project/sterling , https://www.facebook.com/pages/Christopher-C-Deam-Design-and-Architecture/150283898325290 , http://www.ted.com/talks/christopher_deam_restyles_the_airstream , https://www.ted.com/talks/christopher_deam_restyles_the_airstream/transcript , and http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/g...s-airstreams-interior-up-to-date-qa.html?_r=0 .
In this thread for Deam's "Bambi" trailer in particular, see posts #316 and #317 on page 32 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page32 . And for videos of Deam's other trailers for AirStream, see post #217 on page 22, at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page22 .
Now, back to finishing that monster series of posts.....
All best wishes,
Biotect
PS -- Once again, many thanks to Nick for letting us all know that the proper name for an axle configuration where two axles locate in tandem up front, and a single axle trails in the rear, is called a "Chinese Six".
Last edited:
Great thread. Some thoughts:
1. Height-adjusting suspension can provide extra vehicle volume. You don't have to meet legal height limits with the suspension lifted to the offroad height. Keeping it just high enough for the road at 4m will give you several extra square meters of space and lower the centre of gravity, making it more stable at speed.
2. You seem to mention capstone as the turbine maker. Maybe I missed that, but Bladon is popular in concept vehicles and claims much lower weight than conventional engines. No details though.
3. I'm not thrilled by your idea to use exhaust heat to provide heating. For many users who don't like cold climate it's a pure waste. For most of the rest it will provide useful for rather small amounts of time. And you need other means of heating anyway. I would consider using an exhaust heat recovery system to generate electricity.
4. You consider a trailer. If you go this way, co-design it with the truck. Benefits:
* possible aero improvements
* same ride height, angles etc.
* integrated battery system will have better lifetime
* Make your vehicle a pure electric one, w/out a combustion engine. Then add a generator. Suddenly, you don't have to meet emission standards and idling laws. But putting generator on the trailer makes a legally safer combo.
* you could have train-like passage between the car and the trailer, giving you more freedom in interior design.
* I know it's overkill. But I can't resist the temptation to point to the possibility of powered connection between the car and the trailer that works like on vityaz.
5. Co-design the small car too. Folding roof to save space? The same wheel/tire sizes? Making car wheels act as trailer wheels? Running just one generator to propel both cars? Lots of room for improvement...
6. Regenerative suspension. May be a big thing for offroad vehicles.
7. Why have any significant overhang? It only forces you to keep front and rear angled and thus waste space. But everybody does so, so there must be a reason that I miss...
8. If I were to dream, the vehicle would have all wheel steer. By wire only. When cornering, each wheel turns exactly as much as needed. On low speed, front and rear wheels turn in the same direction, cutting your turning radius. At high speed they move in the same direction, effectively increasing your wheelbase and improving stability. And it enables tricks like increasing toe-in angle during braking to improve stability.
9. The more mirrors the better? No. The more cameras the better. Smaller, can be placed anywhere, better aero, no reflexes of sunlight to your eyes.
10. Windscreen protector is not the way to go. Better would be to use something like lexan glass. Much stronger, lighter, with non-catastrophic break modes. More civil look than protectors. But illegal. :|
Maybe this could be worked around somehow, i.e. making a tiny glass windshield for legal reasons and a big lexan one to be actually used? Or shielding glass with lexan?
ADDED:
http://www.theengineer.co.uk/in-dep...-enable-jaguar-turbine-hybrid/1005528.article seems to suggest that Bladon turbine provides 70 kW and weights 35 kg.
1. Height-adjusting suspension can provide extra vehicle volume. You don't have to meet legal height limits with the suspension lifted to the offroad height. Keeping it just high enough for the road at 4m will give you several extra square meters of space and lower the centre of gravity, making it more stable at speed.
2. You seem to mention capstone as the turbine maker. Maybe I missed that, but Bladon is popular in concept vehicles and claims much lower weight than conventional engines. No details though.
3. I'm not thrilled by your idea to use exhaust heat to provide heating. For many users who don't like cold climate it's a pure waste. For most of the rest it will provide useful for rather small amounts of time. And you need other means of heating anyway. I would consider using an exhaust heat recovery system to generate electricity.
4. You consider a trailer. If you go this way, co-design it with the truck. Benefits:
* possible aero improvements
* same ride height, angles etc.
* integrated battery system will have better lifetime
* Make your vehicle a pure electric one, w/out a combustion engine. Then add a generator. Suddenly, you don't have to meet emission standards and idling laws. But putting generator on the trailer makes a legally safer combo.
* you could have train-like passage between the car and the trailer, giving you more freedom in interior design.
* I know it's overkill. But I can't resist the temptation to point to the possibility of powered connection between the car and the trailer that works like on vityaz.
5. Co-design the small car too. Folding roof to save space? The same wheel/tire sizes? Making car wheels act as trailer wheels? Running just one generator to propel both cars? Lots of room for improvement...
6. Regenerative suspension. May be a big thing for offroad vehicles.
7. Why have any significant overhang? It only forces you to keep front and rear angled and thus waste space. But everybody does so, so there must be a reason that I miss...
8. If I were to dream, the vehicle would have all wheel steer. By wire only. When cornering, each wheel turns exactly as much as needed. On low speed, front and rear wheels turn in the same direction, cutting your turning radius. At high speed they move in the same direction, effectively increasing your wheelbase and improving stability. And it enables tricks like increasing toe-in angle during braking to improve stability.
9. The more mirrors the better? No. The more cameras the better. Smaller, can be placed anywhere, better aero, no reflexes of sunlight to your eyes.
10. Windscreen protector is not the way to go. Better would be to use something like lexan glass. Much stronger, lighter, with non-catastrophic break modes. More civil look than protectors. But illegal. :|
Maybe this could be worked around somehow, i.e. making a tiny glass windshield for legal reasons and a big lexan one to be actually used? Or shielding glass with lexan?
ADDED:
http://www.theengineer.co.uk/in-dep...-enable-jaguar-turbine-hybrid/1005528.article seems to suggest that Bladon turbine provides 70 kW and weights 35 kg.
Last edited:
Naaah, not really - for driving anyway...
What you want is exactly this size for driving!! NOW - what YOU then want, when parked is a FOLD-DOWN front-balcony!! Used to protect your huge front-window while driving! What you see being armor on the Typhoon - just re-design that into a window-protector/front-porch!
Swing open door (to deployed front porch) on the passenger side + top fold out sun screen! :sombrero: ....are we getting fancy now!!
[Wothahellizat inspired...]
Cheers,
thjakits
Last edited:
Damn BIO!!
ONE little post from a mere mortal and you just added ANOTHER 6 WEEKS of re-study material before any attempt to build my own!!
[Maybe you should consider to take this thread off Expedition Portal and just start your own site......Bio'sEncyclopediaForgetTheRestWiki.bio (...or something like that) :victory: ]
Typhoon wheel spacing: As you can see in a number of pic/vid posts you made:
e.g.
There are Typhoon versions with different mission profiles:
The shorter version with the left-offset "cockpit" has EVEN axle spacing.
Why?
I assume, this was the first version to be developed and the maximum PRACTIAL spacing between axles for EVEN spacing was determined to be what it is now on the short version.
To expand the production range for a different mission, they took the "power/drive/control unit" as it was and added cargo-space-length between the front unit and the rear most axle.
It seems, to move the second axle to the center of the longer vehicle would be detrimental to the overall maneuverability - what you see on the short version is probably the max length for the EVEN spaced configuration....
Why 2 steering axles? GRIP!! You eliminate about 99% of the "pushing" a non-steer tandem will provide you with!
[I mentioned "UK and Italian 2-front steer-axle trucks a long time ago - ....just didn't know they where called Chinese-Six...:ylsmoke:]
I am sure the Russian Forces have a reason for using both configurations (Kamaz vs. Ural Typhoon) - Kamaz will win hands down in soggy conditions!
For Terraliner it really doesn't matter if you put the 2 axles on the front or the rear - as long as you have TWO steering axles!!
If you keep the tandem rear you can make either one of the 2 a steering axle, but considering the overall length of Terraliner you would be adviced to make the rear most axle the 2nd steering axle, basically turning around the middle axle.....
You might want to run a few computer animations to compare 2 front steerers to 1 front/1 rear steerer....
I wonder if Camo's (??) Russian military vehicle experts referred to the old Soviet Doctrine - nowadays Russia is the new Capitalist sample of the world!!
Stuff has to LAST now, just like in the West!
True - the old philosophy was to run to a determined point and exchange parts or the whole machine...
[I am still amazed about the 9-cyl radial aircraft engine they had - plan was to switch engines every 500-800 hours, 1/2 hour work!!, When these engines became available for the Western Experimental Aviation market, customers were looking for TBO numbers. It was found that the factory STOPPED a trial run of a test engine at something above 5000 hrs!! Just with regular oil-changes.... - for those not familiar with aviation engines, TBO means Time Before/Between Overhaul - today the max time you will get on any certified piston aviation engine is 2200 hrs]
Also remember, things maybe built to last forever, ....unless you give it due MAINTENANCE, ...they won't!
That's where a lot of Russian gear got a bad reputation from....
[Same in every corner of the world with Russian helicopters, LADA cars, etc.... - as this gear always WAS a LOT cheaper than Western gear, it was bought by people who couldn't or didn't want to afford more expensive ware. Now - if you a prone to skimp on money for the goods you are MORE prone to skimp on money for maintenance - bingo! Bad Rep created!!]
Irak Forces leaving behind TONS of gear has probably NOTHING to do with worn-out equipment, more like a "Leave it or die!" situation....
Looking at the vids in the news from the Yemen conflict - it seems the classic/antique/ancient tanks the rebels use (Russian?) seem to work just fine - even though they were probably only at scrap value!
BACK to the Terraliner steering arrangement:
I believe:
1st - in ANY case you will need 2 steering axles to avoid lots of pushing. Though you mostly will be going straight (...just like most tandem-drive trucks, operators choose simplicity over the little extra tire wear), you specifically want to go to "out of this world places" - even if the actual time spent driving in these places will be a very small % of overall driving, these areas are always prone to be "soggy" (from dry dust to mud to snow and ice, slick rock, etc...) you DEFINITELY want steering GRIP - 2 steering axles grip better than one!
2nd - I believe you should reconfigure for 2 steering axles at the FRONT - simply because the torque arm around the rear-pivot axle is a lot better with both steering axles at the front. A rear steering axle will help somewhat, but basically just eliminates "pushing", but because of the short distance to the turning-pivot axle, the steering torque/pull will not be the same as with the front axle....
Camo:
DUDE, what's with that "Orange-Red" glamping stuff?!! OUCH!! My eyes still hurt! :Wow1: :sombrero:
But I certainly agree with your bathroom comment - BIO, forget the medical bath stuff!! Once people are in need of these, they usually don't bother with Terralining anymore. All you do is looking for a maintenance nightmare! Remember, you will be MOVING a lot!
[I know - FullyIntegratedRigidTorsionFree! - Good! But by now we probably agree, that this works to a certain degree, but in the end, there is NO SUCH THING. Something always will flex and twist somewhat, even if you tons of carbon-fibre and torsion-boxes and sandwich-honeycomb. At the end it NEEDS to flex or it will break in short order - or should I rather say SHATTER! You go on the road something will move/flex, you go OFF-road something will MOVE/FLEX!]
This kind of baths are probably not happy if you keep moving them frequently!! If you MUST have a tub, just make it a regular tub with a shower.
Better yet - just make it a shower ONLY!
I'd say, once a person cannot stand enough anymore to take a shower - they won't be much interested in actual Terralining anymore!
Also, you probably don't want to waste water by taking tub baths! If you don't take tub baths to save water - ...you don't need a tub!
Use the space for something else! [E.g. Pop-up waterproof tablet so I can video conference while taking a water saving shower!! :bigbossHL: .....a cam would be great too, for shaving - saves the mirror....]
Back to the Typhoon: In one of the factory videos you can see the frame! Give them a buzz and ask if you can have a frame from them!!
All they have to do is lengthen it to your spec and you are done with the drive train, just build the Terraliner on top!
Where they use a Diesel, you put your power-unit of choice. You might even be able to re-use some of their front cab, bumper, winch, etc.....
But basically you would get a near-perfect frame/suspension/power-train.....
Their "military-confidential-stuff" starts on top of the frame, where mission profiles for the Military and the Terraliner drastically change.
So the the "below military secret stuff"-stuff should be commercially available - ....otherwise just copy them!!
One (last) word to the Tatra-offroad-trial-prowess and the "sliding turn" ability of the Typhoon:
Unless your mission profile changed drastically, you probably won't do much tail sliding in your Million$ rolling home - at least not on purpose!
Though the video-clips about Tatras (and other trucks) of Truck Trials are awesome and hilarious, I doubt that you would want Terraliner to get anywhere near those track conditions! Though you don't see this much in the vids, more often than not Trial Trucks ARE getting stuck ..... a LOT - after all, it's called TRIAL! :sombrero:
Have a closer look - in many Trial vids you can see SERIOUS recovery gear ("Any Brand"-HEAVY excavators preferred!!)
You probably won't offer a CAT-390 in the Recovery Accessory Pack....?
[Though I do like the sketches about ditch recovery with the Truck winch!! I think I need to make me a some 2x2x1/4-square tube stakes with a few pins for my VW-Rok. With a 12000lb winch up front it should lift the front out of any ditch easily with these stakes hooked up in the front......:smiley_drive:]
'nough said
thjakits,
...back to study details of Bio's last 3 days of posts - worth about 6 weeks of reading up!
ONE little post from a mere mortal and you just added ANOTHER 6 WEEKS of re-study material before any attempt to build my own!!
[Maybe you should consider to take this thread off Expedition Portal and just start your own site......Bio'sEncyclopediaForgetTheRestWiki.bio (...or something like that) :victory: ]
Typhoon wheel spacing: As you can see in a number of pic/vid posts you made:
e.g.
There are Typhoon versions with different mission profiles:
The shorter version with the left-offset "cockpit" has EVEN axle spacing.
Why?
I assume, this was the first version to be developed and the maximum PRACTIAL spacing between axles for EVEN spacing was determined to be what it is now on the short version.
To expand the production range for a different mission, they took the "power/drive/control unit" as it was and added cargo-space-length between the front unit and the rear most axle.
It seems, to move the second axle to the center of the longer vehicle would be detrimental to the overall maneuverability - what you see on the short version is probably the max length for the EVEN spaced configuration....
Why 2 steering axles? GRIP!! You eliminate about 99% of the "pushing" a non-steer tandem will provide you with!
[I mentioned "UK and Italian 2-front steer-axle trucks a long time ago - ....just didn't know they where called Chinese-Six...:ylsmoke:]
I am sure the Russian Forces have a reason for using both configurations (Kamaz vs. Ural Typhoon) - Kamaz will win hands down in soggy conditions!
For Terraliner it really doesn't matter if you put the 2 axles on the front or the rear - as long as you have TWO steering axles!!
If you keep the tandem rear you can make either one of the 2 a steering axle, but considering the overall length of Terraliner you would be adviced to make the rear most axle the 2nd steering axle, basically turning around the middle axle.....
You might want to run a few computer animations to compare 2 front steerers to 1 front/1 rear steerer....
I wonder if Camo's (??) Russian military vehicle experts referred to the old Soviet Doctrine - nowadays Russia is the new Capitalist sample of the world!!
Stuff has to LAST now, just like in the West!
True - the old philosophy was to run to a determined point and exchange parts or the whole machine...
[I am still amazed about the 9-cyl radial aircraft engine they had - plan was to switch engines every 500-800 hours, 1/2 hour work!!, When these engines became available for the Western Experimental Aviation market, customers were looking for TBO numbers. It was found that the factory STOPPED a trial run of a test engine at something above 5000 hrs!! Just with regular oil-changes.... - for those not familiar with aviation engines, TBO means Time Before/Between Overhaul - today the max time you will get on any certified piston aviation engine is 2200 hrs]
Also remember, things maybe built to last forever, ....unless you give it due MAINTENANCE, ...they won't!
That's where a lot of Russian gear got a bad reputation from....
[Same in every corner of the world with Russian helicopters, LADA cars, etc.... - as this gear always WAS a LOT cheaper than Western gear, it was bought by people who couldn't or didn't want to afford more expensive ware. Now - if you a prone to skimp on money for the goods you are MORE prone to skimp on money for maintenance - bingo! Bad Rep created!!]
Irak Forces leaving behind TONS of gear has probably NOTHING to do with worn-out equipment, more like a "Leave it or die!" situation....
Looking at the vids in the news from the Yemen conflict - it seems the classic/antique/ancient tanks the rebels use (Russian?) seem to work just fine - even though they were probably only at scrap value!
BACK to the Terraliner steering arrangement:
I believe:
1st - in ANY case you will need 2 steering axles to avoid lots of pushing. Though you mostly will be going straight (...just like most tandem-drive trucks, operators choose simplicity over the little extra tire wear), you specifically want to go to "out of this world places" - even if the actual time spent driving in these places will be a very small % of overall driving, these areas are always prone to be "soggy" (from dry dust to mud to snow and ice, slick rock, etc...) you DEFINITELY want steering GRIP - 2 steering axles grip better than one!
2nd - I believe you should reconfigure for 2 steering axles at the FRONT - simply because the torque arm around the rear-pivot axle is a lot better with both steering axles at the front. A rear steering axle will help somewhat, but basically just eliminates "pushing", but because of the short distance to the turning-pivot axle, the steering torque/pull will not be the same as with the front axle....
Camo:
DUDE, what's with that "Orange-Red" glamping stuff?!! OUCH!! My eyes still hurt! :Wow1: :sombrero:
But I certainly agree with your bathroom comment - BIO, forget the medical bath stuff!! Once people are in need of these, they usually don't bother with Terralining anymore. All you do is looking for a maintenance nightmare! Remember, you will be MOVING a lot!
[I know - FullyIntegratedRigidTorsionFree! - Good! But by now we probably agree, that this works to a certain degree, but in the end, there is NO SUCH THING. Something always will flex and twist somewhat, even if you tons of carbon-fibre and torsion-boxes and sandwich-honeycomb. At the end it NEEDS to flex or it will break in short order - or should I rather say SHATTER! You go on the road something will move/flex, you go OFF-road something will MOVE/FLEX!]
This kind of baths are probably not happy if you keep moving them frequently!! If you MUST have a tub, just make it a regular tub with a shower.
Better yet - just make it a shower ONLY!
I'd say, once a person cannot stand enough anymore to take a shower - they won't be much interested in actual Terralining anymore!
Also, you probably don't want to waste water by taking tub baths! If you don't take tub baths to save water - ...you don't need a tub!
Use the space for something else! [E.g. Pop-up waterproof tablet so I can video conference while taking a water saving shower!! :bigbossHL: .....a cam would be great too, for shaving - saves the mirror....]
Back to the Typhoon: In one of the factory videos you can see the frame! Give them a buzz and ask if you can have a frame from them!!
All they have to do is lengthen it to your spec and you are done with the drive train, just build the Terraliner on top!
Where they use a Diesel, you put your power-unit of choice. You might even be able to re-use some of their front cab, bumper, winch, etc.....
But basically you would get a near-perfect frame/suspension/power-train.....
Their "military-confidential-stuff" starts on top of the frame, where mission profiles for the Military and the Terraliner drastically change.
So the the "below military secret stuff"-stuff should be commercially available - ....otherwise just copy them!!
One (last) word to the Tatra-offroad-trial-prowess and the "sliding turn" ability of the Typhoon:
Unless your mission profile changed drastically, you probably won't do much tail sliding in your Million$ rolling home - at least not on purpose!
Though the video-clips about Tatras (and other trucks) of Truck Trials are awesome and hilarious, I doubt that you would want Terraliner to get anywhere near those track conditions! Though you don't see this much in the vids, more often than not Trial Trucks ARE getting stuck ..... a LOT - after all, it's called TRIAL! :sombrero:
Have a closer look - in many Trial vids you can see SERIOUS recovery gear ("Any Brand"-HEAVY excavators preferred!!)
You probably won't offer a CAT-390 in the Recovery Accessory Pack....?
[Though I do like the sketches about ditch recovery with the Truck winch!! I think I need to make me a some 2x2x1/4-square tube stakes with a few pins for my VW-Rok. With a 12000lb winch up front it should lift the front out of any ditch easily with these stakes hooked up in the front......:smiley_drive:]
'nough said
thjakits,
...back to study details of Bio's last 3 days of posts - worth about 6 weeks of reading up!
Last edited:
biotect
Designer
..
Greetings Thjakits,
The following is mainly a response to the quote appended immediately above.
I'll address the “bathtub” and "glamping" issues in a later series of posts….. But truly glad that the orange ARC bedroom made your eyes hurt!
I deliberately chose those images for "shock effect", to show what cutting-edge Airstream interior design can be like nowadays. Orange is my least favorite color; if there is one color that I positively hate, it would be orange. But I love the egg-shaped entry door to the bedroom, the quilted padding, and the Art-Deco spot-lamps. I like most of ARC's other designs much more, but none of them scream "glamping!!" quite as loudly as this one. So that's why I used it: to make a very clear point.
Again, more on that in a later post.
*********************************************
Now, in response to the quote above......
First off, I never intended that the TerraLiner should do anything even remotely similar to Tatra 813 "Chinese Sixes" used in truck trials. This is most emphatically not why I discussed them. I realize that you will need some time to digest everything that I posted. But if you read carefully, you will see that in a number of places I make it very clear that I do not intend that the TerraLiner should be able to pull off the same stunts performed by these Tatra 813 Chinese Sixes.
The serious recovery equipment on hand during these truck trials is only too evident in the videos and photos, and only a fool would fail to notice the bulldozers and excavators. And I hope you do not consider me a fool….? Slightly crazy, yes, but a fool? :wings:
Rather, I discussed the Tatra 813 Chinese Sixes and posted abundant video and imagery, because I want to know how they might handle differently from a regular 6x6. I would love to hear from someone who could discuss this difference at length: someone qualified, someone who really knows their stuff, who really understands how Tatra 813 Chinese Sixes handle, and why they might be superior to regular 6x6s…… So Thjakits, if you have plenty of personal experience with Tatra 813 Chinese Sixes, then great, please chime in. But if not, again, I would love to hear from someone who does have plenty of personal experience, and who can "explain" all the diverse advantages of the Chinese Six configuration, in some degree of detail.
The reason I am asking is this: so far, everything I've read suggests that simply in terms of handling, a Chinese Six with twin steer up front is vastly superior to the more conventional axle configuration. The Chinese Six seems especially preferred when doing some fairly "ordinary" driving along unpaved mountain roads, for instance. Not just driving off-road through sand and muck in a truck trial, but also simply exploring back-country mountain roads that are unpaved.
That's the reason given for the Chinese Six wheel configuration on those Austrian forestry trucks discussed in post #1369 on page 137, at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...edition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page137 :
These are practical work-trucks that simply need to be driven on unpaved mountain roads. They are "bad-road" trucks, not off-road trucks. And yet the company that had them specially built, thought it would be a major advantage for them to have a Chinese Six axle arrangement.
This intrigues me, and that's why I devoted so much effort to exploring the Kamaz Typhoon, the Tatra 813 Chinese Six, and the general question of the possible advantages conferred by the Chinese Six axle configuration……
*********************************************
1. Defining “Bad Road”
*********************************************
Now although the TerraLiner has been repeatedly and explicitly specified throughout this thread as a “bad-road” vehicle, and not a true “off-road” vehicle, what exactly do we mean by “bad-road”???
So far in this thread, I've discussed the dirt tracks in central Australia at some length – see posts #214 and #215 on page 22 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page22 , posts #609 - #613 on pages 61 and 62 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page61 and http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page62 , and post #957 on page 96 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page96 . I have also mentioned the G-219 highway in western Tibet a number of times, as well as the Kolyma highway in Siberia. These all seem like roads that the TerraLiner should be able to travel.
But where to draw the line? How dangerous or difficult must a road be, such that one would say that traveling it is more like “off-road” driving, as opposed to “bad road” driving? Where should one draw the line regarding the TerraLiner's capabilities? And in addition, what should be the limits of TerraLiner's off-road capability? For instance, egn has taken his large MAN-KAT 6x6 up a dry creek bed in Albania – see post #662 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page67 , and post #741 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page75 . Should the TerraLiner be able to do the same?
Probably the very best website documenting the world's most dangerous and truly spectacular roads, is http://www.dangerousroads.org . It's a very well-formatted website, and jam-packed with information.
One might then state the TerraLiner's operational requirements something like this: the TerraLiner should be able to drive as many of the roads listed on the “Dangerous Roads” website as possible. After all, many or even most people overland for the journey, not the destination, and for travel along spectacular roads in particular. So if most of the spectacular roads listed on “Dangerous Roads” were not in principle accessible to the TerraLiner, the TerraLiner would prove a much less attractive vehicle.
Here are some videos about some of the more spectacular and/or dangerous roads on the planet. But note: almost none of these are roads in Africa, because as already indicated many times earlier in the thread, the TerraLiner is intended mostly as a First, Second, and occasionally Third World vehicle; and not as vehicle designed to negotiate mud-tracks in Fourth-World central African countries:
[video=youtube;MMOnAlFgxvc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMOnAlFgxvc [/video] [video=youtube;DkWAn4rtLa4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkWAn4rtLa4 [/video] [video=youtube;IZvxVJoAl0E]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZvxVJoAl0E [/video]
[video=youtube;jTGOWH9hxDk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTGOWH9hxDk [/video] [video=youtube;knxe9fKlmaI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knxe9fKlmaI [/video]
[video=youtube;BlG-EGL9uY4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlG-EGL9uY4 [/video] [video=youtube;gNwetNTmLXU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNwetNTmLXU [/video]
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
Greetings Thjakits,
The following is mainly a response to the quote appended immediately above.
I'll address the “bathtub” and "glamping" issues in a later series of posts….. But truly glad that the orange ARC bedroom made your eyes hurt!
I deliberately chose those images for "shock effect", to show what cutting-edge Airstream interior design can be like nowadays. Orange is my least favorite color; if there is one color that I positively hate, it would be orange. But I love the egg-shaped entry door to the bedroom, the quilted padding, and the Art-Deco spot-lamps. I like most of ARC's other designs much more, but none of them scream "glamping!!" quite as loudly as this one. So that's why I used it: to make a very clear point.
Again, more on that in a later post.
*********************************************
Now, in response to the quote above......
First off, I never intended that the TerraLiner should do anything even remotely similar to Tatra 813 "Chinese Sixes" used in truck trials. This is most emphatically not why I discussed them. I realize that you will need some time to digest everything that I posted. But if you read carefully, you will see that in a number of places I make it very clear that I do not intend that the TerraLiner should be able to pull off the same stunts performed by these Tatra 813 Chinese Sixes.
The serious recovery equipment on hand during these truck trials is only too evident in the videos and photos, and only a fool would fail to notice the bulldozers and excavators. And I hope you do not consider me a fool….? Slightly crazy, yes, but a fool? :wings:
Rather, I discussed the Tatra 813 Chinese Sixes and posted abundant video and imagery, because I want to know how they might handle differently from a regular 6x6. I would love to hear from someone who could discuss this difference at length: someone qualified, someone who really knows their stuff, who really understands how Tatra 813 Chinese Sixes handle, and why they might be superior to regular 6x6s…… So Thjakits, if you have plenty of personal experience with Tatra 813 Chinese Sixes, then great, please chime in. But if not, again, I would love to hear from someone who does have plenty of personal experience, and who can "explain" all the diverse advantages of the Chinese Six configuration, in some degree of detail.
The reason I am asking is this: so far, everything I've read suggests that simply in terms of handling, a Chinese Six with twin steer up front is vastly superior to the more conventional axle configuration. The Chinese Six seems especially preferred when doing some fairly "ordinary" driving along unpaved mountain roads, for instance. Not just driving off-road through sand and muck in a truck trial, but also simply exploring back-country mountain roads that are unpaved.
That's the reason given for the Chinese Six wheel configuration on those Austrian forestry trucks discussed in post #1369 on page 137, at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...edition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page137 :
These are practical work-trucks that simply need to be driven on unpaved mountain roads. They are "bad-road" trucks, not off-road trucks. And yet the company that had them specially built, thought it would be a major advantage for them to have a Chinese Six axle arrangement.
This intrigues me, and that's why I devoted so much effort to exploring the Kamaz Typhoon, the Tatra 813 Chinese Six, and the general question of the possible advantages conferred by the Chinese Six axle configuration……
*********************************************
1. Defining “Bad Road”
*********************************************
Now although the TerraLiner has been repeatedly and explicitly specified throughout this thread as a “bad-road” vehicle, and not a true “off-road” vehicle, what exactly do we mean by “bad-road”???
So far in this thread, I've discussed the dirt tracks in central Australia at some length – see posts #214 and #215 on page 22 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page22 , posts #609 - #613 on pages 61 and 62 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page61 and http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page62 , and post #957 on page 96 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page96 . I have also mentioned the G-219 highway in western Tibet a number of times, as well as the Kolyma highway in Siberia. These all seem like roads that the TerraLiner should be able to travel.
But where to draw the line? How dangerous or difficult must a road be, such that one would say that traveling it is more like “off-road” driving, as opposed to “bad road” driving? Where should one draw the line regarding the TerraLiner's capabilities? And in addition, what should be the limits of TerraLiner's off-road capability? For instance, egn has taken his large MAN-KAT 6x6 up a dry creek bed in Albania – see post #662 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page67 , and post #741 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page75 . Should the TerraLiner be able to do the same?
Probably the very best website documenting the world's most dangerous and truly spectacular roads, is http://www.dangerousroads.org . It's a very well-formatted website, and jam-packed with information.
One might then state the TerraLiner's operational requirements something like this: the TerraLiner should be able to drive as many of the roads listed on the “Dangerous Roads” website as possible. After all, many or even most people overland for the journey, not the destination, and for travel along spectacular roads in particular. So if most of the spectacular roads listed on “Dangerous Roads” were not in principle accessible to the TerraLiner, the TerraLiner would prove a much less attractive vehicle.
Here are some videos about some of the more spectacular and/or dangerous roads on the planet. But note: almost none of these are roads in Africa, because as already indicated many times earlier in the thread, the TerraLiner is intended mostly as a First, Second, and occasionally Third World vehicle; and not as vehicle designed to negotiate mud-tracks in Fourth-World central African countries:
[video=youtube;MMOnAlFgxvc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMOnAlFgxvc [/video] [video=youtube;DkWAn4rtLa4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkWAn4rtLa4 [/video] [video=youtube;IZvxVJoAl0E]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZvxVJoAl0E [/video]
[video=youtube;jTGOWH9hxDk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTGOWH9hxDk [/video] [video=youtube;knxe9fKlmaI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knxe9fKlmaI [/video]
[video=youtube;BlG-EGL9uY4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlG-EGL9uY4 [/video] [video=youtube;gNwetNTmLXU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNwetNTmLXU [/video]
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
Last edited:
biotect
Designer
..
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
[video=youtube;5_mTyz-wANY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_mTyz-wANY [/video]
[video=youtube;HzyQ8ONPwF8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzyQ8ONPwF8 [/video]
[video=youtube;K9CtsDB-DaY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9CtsDB-DaY [/video]
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
[video=youtube;5_mTyz-wANY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_mTyz-wANY [/video]
[video=youtube;HzyQ8ONPwF8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzyQ8ONPwF8 [/video]
[video=youtube;K9CtsDB-DaY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9CtsDB-DaY [/video]
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
Last edited:
biotect
Designer
..
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
[video=vimeo;8010978]https://vimeo.com/8010978[/video] [video=youtube;TWNLjg2oIcI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWNLjg2oIcI [/video]
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
[video=vimeo;8010978]https://vimeo.com/8010978[/video] [video=youtube;TWNLjg2oIcI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWNLjg2oIcI [/video]
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
Last edited:
biotect
Designer
..
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
2. Roads Passable and Impassible for the TerraLiner
*********************************************
Now granted, not all of the roads in the previous videos could be considered "Bad". Some of them are actually quite good. I merely wanted to include them because they are unusually spectacular, for instance, the Transfagarasan in Romania. That particular series of "Top Gear" clips, in which the show's hosts wax poetic in a state of petrol-head bliss as they race their super-cars along Transfagarasan's curves, is my favorite "Top Gear" sequence of all time. It's only too easy for me to imagine the TerraLiner sweeping along the same curves, like the large truck in the video below:
At the other end of the spectrum, some of the roads illustrated in the videos will probably be inaccessible to the TerraLiner simply because they are not maintained, and they are strictly for motorcycles -- for instance, the BAM (Baikal-Amur Mainline) service road that runs parallel to the railway tracks -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baikal–Amur_Mainline , http://www.dangerousroads.org/eastern-europe/russia/4772-bam-road.html , https://bermudarover.wordpress.com/2013/09/17/the-bam-road-and-maps-of-russia/ , and http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=533442 :
The BAM's bridges are falling apart, and in many places even motorbikes have to drive down into canyons and ford across rivers, because the bridges have disappeared:
In the maps below the BAM railway is in green:
So too, roads “etched” into sides of cliffs will not be passable for a vehicle of the TerraLiner's size and height:
There is always a tradeoff between vehicle size and geographic reach, and clearly the TerraLiner will not be able to go everywhere, on all roads. The TerraLiner will not be able to travel all the roads that a motorcycle can, nor all the roads that small 4 x 4 Unimog could travel. But that's a tradeoff that has already been discussed ad nauseam earlier in the thread.
With that said, other roads that are clearly much more on the "bad" side of things, seem big enough and firm enough to handle the TerraLiner: for instance, the Karakoram and Pamir highways, the Tianamen Mountain road, perhaps Bolivia's "Death Road", the Bajada de los Caracoles del Paso Libertadores between Argentina and Chile , the Pan-American highway through Mexico, central, and south America (but not the Darien Gap), the various gravel roads in the video about Georgia, the Dalton highway in Alaska, and so on. And any number of other roads, paved and unpaved, as documented on the "Dangerous Roads" website -- http://www.dangerousroads.org .
So my question is: how could the axle configuration and the suspension of the TerraLiner be optimized, so as to maximize its ability to handle even the very roughest of bad roads?
*********************************************
3. Bad Roads during the Rainy Season
*********************************************
To put the question even more precisely: to what extent should the TerraLiner be able to travel on a “bad road” even when it is really bad? For instance, during the rainy season, when some sections of the road might be washed out, or under water?
Many otherwise wide, expansive, passable dirt roads in open deserts become covered by lakes of water, just a foot or two deep, because drainage is so poor:
[video=youtube;vm3SavgCqV4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vm3SavgCqV4 [/video]
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
2. Roads Passable and Impassible for the TerraLiner
*********************************************
Now granted, not all of the roads in the previous videos could be considered "Bad". Some of them are actually quite good. I merely wanted to include them because they are unusually spectacular, for instance, the Transfagarasan in Romania. That particular series of "Top Gear" clips, in which the show's hosts wax poetic in a state of petrol-head bliss as they race their super-cars along Transfagarasan's curves, is my favorite "Top Gear" sequence of all time. It's only too easy for me to imagine the TerraLiner sweeping along the same curves, like the large truck in the video below:
At the other end of the spectrum, some of the roads illustrated in the videos will probably be inaccessible to the TerraLiner simply because they are not maintained, and they are strictly for motorcycles -- for instance, the BAM (Baikal-Amur Mainline) service road that runs parallel to the railway tracks -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baikal–Amur_Mainline , http://www.dangerousroads.org/eastern-europe/russia/4772-bam-road.html , https://bermudarover.wordpress.com/2013/09/17/the-bam-road-and-maps-of-russia/ , and http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=533442 :
The BAM's bridges are falling apart, and in many places even motorbikes have to drive down into canyons and ford across rivers, because the bridges have disappeared:
In the maps below the BAM railway is in green:
So too, roads “etched” into sides of cliffs will not be passable for a vehicle of the TerraLiner's size and height:
There is always a tradeoff between vehicle size and geographic reach, and clearly the TerraLiner will not be able to go everywhere, on all roads. The TerraLiner will not be able to travel all the roads that a motorcycle can, nor all the roads that small 4 x 4 Unimog could travel. But that's a tradeoff that has already been discussed ad nauseam earlier in the thread.
With that said, other roads that are clearly much more on the "bad" side of things, seem big enough and firm enough to handle the TerraLiner: for instance, the Karakoram and Pamir highways, the Tianamen Mountain road, perhaps Bolivia's "Death Road", the Bajada de los Caracoles del Paso Libertadores between Argentina and Chile , the Pan-American highway through Mexico, central, and south America (but not the Darien Gap), the various gravel roads in the video about Georgia, the Dalton highway in Alaska, and so on. And any number of other roads, paved and unpaved, as documented on the "Dangerous Roads" website -- http://www.dangerousroads.org .
So my question is: how could the axle configuration and the suspension of the TerraLiner be optimized, so as to maximize its ability to handle even the very roughest of bad roads?
*********************************************
3. Bad Roads during the Rainy Season
*********************************************
To put the question even more precisely: to what extent should the TerraLiner be able to travel on a “bad road” even when it is really bad? For instance, during the rainy season, when some sections of the road might be washed out, or under water?
Many otherwise wide, expansive, passable dirt roads in open deserts become covered by lakes of water, just a foot or two deep, because drainage is so poor:
[video=youtube;vm3SavgCqV4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vm3SavgCqV4 [/video]
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
Last edited: