Yikes ! Electric Bikes !

"effi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

are these things as revolutionary as they look?

They are merely baby motorcycles

Quoted message said:

any leads on which are best?

it depends.

Quoted message said:

hmmm...supposedly no license in most states...

It depends.

Quoted message said:

how do they do in the rain?

same as any other moped.

Quoted message said:

here's some of what i saw

Or some of what you're selling, maybe?

Quoted message said:

zapworld.comzapworld.comOpen ↗ and check out the personal hovercraft

Basically the same thing as at Hammechler-Schlemmer. If I'm not mistaken, this uses a drive wheel
underneath to make it go. Not a true 'hover'. Hovercraft are cool and fun, but definately NOT good
for regular transportation.

Pete

"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Basically the same thing as at Hammechler-Schlemmer.

something you're selling???

Quoted message said:

If I'm not mistaken,

that's not being very specific

Quoted message said:

this uses a drive wheel underneath to make it go. Not a true 'hover'. Hovercraft are cool and fun,
but definately NOT good for regular transportation.

Pete

"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

zapworld.comzapworld.comOpen ↗ and check out the personal hovercraft

Basically the same thing as at Hammechler-Schlemmer. If I'm not mistaken, this uses a drive wheel
underneath to make it go. Not a true 'hover'.

i think you're wrong, it says:

Ride 3-4 inches off the ground Similar technology used by the military Top Speed: up to 15 mph

Quoted message said:

Hovercraft are cool and fun, but definately NOT good for regular transportation.

i think you're wriong here too, you're just wrong all over

Quoted message said:

Pete

"effi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

zapworld.comzapworld.comOpen ↗ and check out the personal hovercraft

Basically the same thing as at Hammechler-Schlemmer. If I'm not

mistaken,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

this uses a drive wheel underneath to make it go. Not a true 'hover'.

i think you're wrong, it says:

Ride 3-4 inches off the ground Similar technology used by the military Top Speed: up to 15 mph

Having helped my son build a very low end, but similar design hover....15mph is not possible without
some sort of drive mech. Whether a fan/prop, as in a conventional hover, or a drive wheel as in this
thing....it needs *something* to get up to 15mph.

Simple leaning and letting air escape out the side will not get you up to 15mph. Unless you're on a
hill...😉 Then you have other problems.

From www.hammacher.com (search on hover) hammacher.com10321.aspOpen ↗
"...the hover scooter provides an unprecedented experience in personal transportation, levitating
inches above the ground and speeding a single rider across land on a cushion of air."

"To increase acceleration, the rider leans back slightly while gripping the handlebar, and the
friction drive wheel at the underside rear of the scooter makes contact with the ground, increasing
speed up to a maximum of approximately 15 mph. The scooter deftly glides over level, solid ground
such as concrete, asphalt, or well-groomed grass free of debris, sand, stones, and other obstacles."

You can buy the Hammacher-Schlemmer toy for $15,000. Ours came in at the grand total of $32. And was
used about as much as a $15k one would be. But it did come in first for a 4th grade science fair.

*everything* is "similar technology used by the military". Your car is 'similar' to ones used by the
military. Your sneakers are 'similar' to ones used by the miltary. Your PC is 'similar' to ones used
by the military.

Pete

let's make it easy on you

stop making up stuff and either cite the site i cite as to your version of how thier hovercraft is
built, or go suck an egg

"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"effi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

> zapworld.comzapworld.comOpen ↗ and check out the personal hovercraft

Basically the same thing as at Hammechler-Schlemmer. If I'm not

mistaken,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

this uses a drive wheel underneath to make it go. Not a true 'hover'.

i think you're wrong, it says:

Ride 3-4 inches off the ground Similar technology used by the military Top Speed: up to 15 mph

Having helped my son build a very low end, but similar design

hover....15mph

Quoted message said:

is not possible without some sort of drive mech. Whether a fan/prop, as in

a

Quoted message said:

conventional hover, or a drive wheel as in this thing....it needs *something* to get up to 15mph.

Simple leaning and letting air escape out the side will not get you up to 15mph. Unless you're on
a hill...😉 Then you have other problems.

From www.hammacher.com (search on hover) hammacher.com10321.aspOpen ↗
"...the hover scooter provides an unprecedented experience in personal transportation, levitating
inches above the ground and speeding a single rider across land on a cushion of air."

"To increase acceleration, the rider leans back slightly while gripping

the

Quoted message said:

handlebar, and the friction drive wheel at the underside rear of the

scooter

Quoted message said:

makes contact with the ground, increasing speed up to a maximum of approximately 15 mph. The
scooter deftly glides over level, solid ground such as concrete, asphalt, or well-groomed grass
free of debris, sand, stones, and other obstacles."

You can buy the Hammacher-Schlemmer toy for $15,000. Ours came in at the grand total of $32.
And was used about as much as a $15k one would be. But it did come in first for a 4th grade
science fair.

*everything* is "similar technology used by the military". Your car is 'similar' to ones used by
the military. Your sneakers are 'similar' to

ones

Quoted message said:

used by the miltary. Your PC is 'similar' to ones used by the military.

Pete

Tue, 17 Jun 2003 01:07:13 -0500, <[email hidden]>, The worthless skin sack,
"effi" <[email hidden]> piddled:

Quoted message said:

let's make it easy on you

\snip

netmeister.orglearn2quote.htmlOpen ↗

Learn to quote, find your shift key and have somebody empty your diaper.
--
zk

effi said:

"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Hovercraft are cool and fun, but definately NOT good for regular transportation.

i think you're wriong here too, you're just wrong all over

Quoted message said:

I dunno... I've never had personal experience with hovercraft but... think in terms of hills or
gusty winds. I don't think I'd want to be sharing the road with any hovercraft under those
circumstances. As the previous poster said, "NOT good for regular transportation."

larry
--
To reply by e-mail, be polite. Rudeness will get you nowhere.

"effi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

let's make it easy on you

stop making up stuff and either cite the site i cite as to your version of how thier hovercraft is
built, or go suck an egg

Hang on there, Sparky. Don't get your panties in a bunch.

Why are you so defensive of this thing?

The website you refer to is curiously slim on details of this thing. However...the description they
give is quite similar to the description of the Hammacher/Schlemmer "AirBoard".

In addition...pictures of the two machines show they are virtually identical. Down to the same decal
on the side, near the riders foot.

So..let us use a little deductive reasoning: [text from the two websites follows]
hammacher.com10321.aspOpen ↗ and zapworld.comairboard2.htmOpen ↗

H/S - Calls it the "Levitating Hover Scooter" But the name on the side is "AirBoard" Zap - Calls it
the "AirBoard" (Logo on the side unreadable in the picture)

I/S - " increasing speed up to a maximum of approximately 15 mph." Zap - " It goes up to 15 mph. "

J/S - "48" H (with handle bar) x 75" Diameter" Zap - "Height incl. handle 1200 mm (4 ft 0 ins)
Diameter 1600 mm (6 ft 3ins)"

K/S - Deck is 12" H Zap - Deck height 300 mm (1ft 0 ins)

L/S - "For single riders ages 16 and up, to a maximum of 220 lbs" Zap - "Total payload, incl. rider
100kg (220 lb) "

M/S - "330 lbs" Zap - Approximate shipping weight (TBC) 150kg (330 lb)

Gee....do you think they might be the same machine, sold by two different vendors?

From the H/S website - "To increase acceleration, the rider leans back slightly while gripping the
handlebar, and the friction drive wheel at the underside rear of the scooter makes contact with the
ground, increasing speed up to a maximum of approximately 15 mph."

Note the words *friction drive*.

N/S also states that there is "a stream of air exiting a vent in the back provides light forward
thrust" *Light forward thrust*. You need the wheel underneath to get up to the 15mph top speed.

There also appears to be no mechanism on the handlebars for the rider to actuate a rudder, or
otherwise steer the "stream of air" that comes out the back. Without that...how the hell do you
steer it? Leaning and letting air escape out one side or the other is *not*, I repeat NOT enough to
actually steer a hovercraft with any authority. Unless the physics on your planet are different than
around here on planet Earth.

So, to sum up. The two machines do appear to be *the same*. The H/S machine does, according to its
own description, have a "drive wheel" underneath. So it would stand to reason that the Zap machine
does as well.

Very cute machines. But as I said...not a true hovercraft.

Was that so hard?

Pete when was the last time you studied hovercraft design and operation? I have.

In article said:

The website you refer to is curiously slim on details of this thing. However...the description
they give is quite similar to the description of the Hammacher/Schlemmer "AirBoard".

In addition...pictures of the two machines show they are virtually identical. Down to the same
decal on the side, near the riders foot.

So..let us use a little deductive reasoning: [text from the two websites follows]
hammacher.com10321.aspOpen ↗ and zapworld.comairboard2.htmOpen ↗

Interesting. I've been transcribing a documentary about oddball flying machines. One of the items is
also called an "Airboard", designed & manufactured by Kevin Inkster's Arbortech company in Perth,
Australia. airboard.com.aufaq.htmlOpen ↗ This unit employs a drivewheel for
acceleration, and brushes underneath at the sides to provide a little friction for steering.

Some other items I've encountered in my work include a "car that flies" called the Sokol, designed
by Dr Branko Sahr, a "plane that drives" called the SkyCar, by Dr Paul Moller, and Steven
Bennett's private enterprise Nova space rocket, with which he aspires to win the X-Prize. Lots of
interesting stuff.

cheers, Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD Above address is just a spam midden. I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn
[point] bc [point] ca

"Tom Keats" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Interesting. I've been transcribing a documentary about oddball flying machines. One of the items
is also called an "Airboard", designed & manufactured by Kevin Inkster's Arbortech company in
Perth, Australia. airboard.com.aufaq.htmlOpen ↗ This unit employs a
drivewheel for acceleration, and brushes underneath at the sides to provide a little friction for
steering.

From the picture and description, that's the same vehicle as sold at Zapword and
Hammacher/Schlemmer.
H/S sells theirs for $15k.

Quoted message said:

Some other items I've encountered in my work include a "car that flies" called the Sokol, designed
by Dr Branko Sahr, a "plane that drives" called the SkyCar, by Dr Paul Moller, and Steven
Bennett's private enterprise Nova space rocket, with which he aspires to win the X-Prize. Lots of
interesting stuff.

Moller's machine seems to be serious vaporware. It's always coming RealSoonNow.

You've seen the Pinto conversion that was out in the 70's?

Thankfully, none of these have taken off...🙂 People can't handle a vehicle in 2D with guiding
lines, much less 3D.

Pete

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

are these things as revolutionary as they look? any leads on which are best? hmmm...supposedly no
license in most states... how do they do in the rain? here's some of what i saw

They are obviously making quite a profit on shipping, so for that reason alone I would not bother
with them.
-----------------
Alex __O _-\<,_ (_)/ (_)

Pete said:

Moller's machine seems to be serious vaporware. It's always coming RealSoonNow.

Indeed. But he's had working prototypes for a while now, I think, so the main problem now seems to
be refining it into a package that's costeffective to manufacture and cheap enough to have a decent
market -- plus finding someone to market it.

Quoted message said:

Thankfully, none of these have taken off...🙂 People can't handle a vehicle in 2D with guiding
lines, much less 3D.

The most recent "SkyCar" info video incarnation shown on Discovery the other day neatly solved that
problem by proposing the SkyCars will be completely computer controlled. You just punch in to what
point B you want to go from point A (he's been watching Minority Report, I guess). I give it 5-10
years before that tech is even remotely viable, let alone commercially, largescale viable &
implemented.

Jasper

"Jasper Janssen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Pete said:

Basically the same thing as at Hammechler-Schlemmer. If I'm not mistaken, this uses a drive wheel
underneath to make it go. Not a true 'hover'. Hovercraft are cool and fun, but definately NOT
good for regular transportation.

What, just because they don't have brakes and it's hard to keep them going in a straight line?

Use a variable-strength cushion: carrying some of the weight on the road, with a wheel(s)
underneath for steering/braking purposes (with emergency venting for hard braking), and carrying
the full weight on the water, possibly using a rudder. If you use a solid rather than spoked
wheel, you can use the wheel as rudder, for that matter.

If you're going to use wheels for steering and braking, what does the air cushion and prop/fan drive
gain you? Except for over-the-water capability.

Just beef up the little axles, use the wheels for a drive system as well, and make it a car...😉

Pete

"Jasper Janssen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Pete said:

Moller's machine seems to be serious vaporware. It's always coming RealSoonNow.

Indeed. But he's had working prototypes for a while now, I think, so the main problem now seems to
be refining it into a package that's costeffective to manufacture and cheap enough to have a
decent market -- plus finding someone to market it.

The working prototypes still have the HUGE problem of gas mileage. Without a radically different
fuel and engine system...there's no way it can be more fuel efficient than a regular ground car.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Thankfully, none of these have taken off...🙂 People can't handle a

vehicle

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

in 2D with guiding lines, much less 3D.

The most recent "SkyCar" info video incarnation shown on Discovery the other day neatly solved
that problem by proposing the SkyCars will be completely computer controlled. You just punch in to
what point B you want to go from point A (he's been watching Minority Report, I guess). I give it
5-10 years before that tech is even remotely viable, let alone commercially, largescale viable &
implemented.

Will the computer control and nav be good enough for a +- 1 foot deviation? That's what's needed for
takeoff and landing, unless you have a BIG space to land in. And if they were to become
popular...that space goes away.

The only way it would work is full computer control after engine start, all the way to engine
shutdown. Imagine trying to land vertically in a standard parking lot, squeezing between the 2
SkyCars on either side. And then pray there's no side gust just as you're coming in for a landing.

Pete

Pete said:

"Jasper Janssen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

[Hovercraft not really great transportationally]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

What, just because they don't have brakes and it's hard to keep them going in a straight line?

Use a variable-strength cushion: carrying some of the weight on the road, with a wheel(s)
underneath for steering/braking purposes (with emergency venting for hard braking), and carrying
the full weight on the water, possibly using a rudder. If you use a solid rather than spoked
wheel, you can use the wheel as rudder, for that matter.

If you're going to use wheels for steering and braking, what does the air cushion and prop/fan
drive gain you? Except for over-the-water capability.

You say that like it's a small thing. Dude. Why *else* have a hovercraft but for the land/water
amphibious capability? I mean, it's not for speed or controlled cornering, that's for sure. I mean,
okay, because of their very lack of controllability they're fun to drive, I'd imagine, but not
particularly useful -- except on the water where bad cornering ability is hardly restricted to
hovercrafts.

I think a hybrid "best of both worlds" design would be cool. By the way, if you've got the huge fan
for propulsion, you don't need drive to the wheel/rudder assembly. Just for steering/auxiliary
braking. You'd have to design both the wheel system and the air cushion system to be able to take up
to 100% of the loaded weight, though. The wheels, because otherwise you can;t ever turn it off, and
the cushion for water use.

Jasper

Pete said:

"Jasper Janssen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The working prototypes still have the HUGE problem of gas mileage. Without a radically different
fuel and engine system...there's no way it can be more fuel efficient than a regular ground car.

Yes, well. But they're coooooooool.

Quoted message said:

Will the computer control and nav be good enough for a +- 1 foot deviation? That's what's needed
for takeoff and landing, unless you have a BIG space to land in. And if they were to become
popular...that space goes away.

It shouldn't be hard at all. GPS can get you within yards even on the move, and parking spaces
delineated by standard white lines painted on pavement shouldn't be too hard to fix on with a bottom
mounted camera. Th

Quoted message said:

The only way it would work is full computer control after engine start, all the way to engine
shutdown. Imagine trying to land vertically in a standard parking lot, squeezing between the 2
SkyCars on either side. And then pray there's no side gust just as you're coming in for a landing.

And that's the real issue: handling, especially in things like wind conditions. Computers are almost
never the problem, or at least will not be in the foreseeable future, but translating the knowledge
in the computer of what needs to happen into action in the real world reliably and repeatedly is
something else. You've got physical limites to deal with, there.

Of course, most people considering the skycar will own homes, and that often means they already have
a huge ass parking space tailormade for a thing like that: a flat roof. Or alternatively, you can
use your back yard or wherever. The SkyCar is not limited to parking at or near the road system,
like regular cars.

Jasper

"Jasper Janssen" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

You say that like it's a small thing. Dude. Why *else* have a hovercraft but for the land/water
amphibious capability? I mean, it's not for speed or controlled cornering, that's for sure. I
mean, okay, because of their very lack of controllability they're fun to drive, I'd imagine, but
not particularly useful -- except on the water where bad cornering ability is hardly restricted to
hovercrafts.

I think a hybrid "best of both worlds" design would be cool. By the way, if you've got the huge
fan for propulsion, you don't need drive to the wheel/rudder assembly. Just for steering/auxiliary
braking. You'd have to design both the wheel system and the air cushion system to be able to take
up to 100% of the loaded weight, though. The wheels, because otherwise you can;t ever turn it off,
and the cushion for water use.

hehe...Don't get me wrong. I think hovers are *very* cool. So cool, in fact, that me and my son
are in the process of designing two. One small, standup 'hoverboard' type thing, and a regular
size 2 seater.

But basically, thay are boats that can also go overland. If we are talking about regular, everyday
transportation systems (car replacements) hovercraft carry a LOT of problems.

Having 'the best of both worlds' introduces problems in hover mode. You have to carry around all
that extra weight (wheels and steering mech). And in road mode....the prop also has to overcome the
wheel drag. And how do you go up hills?

Pete

effi said:

are these things as revolutionary as they look? any leads on which are best? hmmm...supposedly no
license in most states... how do they do in the rain? here's some of what i saw

<snip>

Quoted message said:

econvergence.netemb.htmOpen ↗
a.. Fully electric, powered by rechargeable batteries
a.. 30 miles per hour top speed
a.. 0 to 30 miles per hour in 4 seconds
a.. 20 mile range between charges

Not a CPSC e-bike since pedals removed, therefore, license & registration required.

<snip>
--
Nobody but a fool goes into a federal counterrorism operation without duct tape - Richard Preston,
THE COBRA EVENT.

"John Bartley K7AAY (ex-KGH2126)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

effi said:

are these things as revolutionary as they look? any leads on which are best? hmmm...supposedly no
license in most states... how do they do in the rain? here's some of what i saw

<snip>

Quoted message said:

econvergence.netemb.htmOpen ↗
a.. Fully electric, powered by rechargeable batteries
a.. 30 miles per hour top speed
a.. 0 to 30 miles per hour in 4 seconds
a.. 20 mile range between charges

Not a CPSC e-bike since pedals removed, therefore, license & registration required.

<snip>
--
Nobody but a fool goes into a federal counterrorism operation without duct

tape - Richard Preston, THE COBRA EVENT.

sharp eye, i didn't notice pedals removed....