John.P.Vitamvas@jci.com wrote:

I hate to jump in the middle of this discussion;  however I must interject
and say that I think that the practice of automotive companies exploring
different technologies is a good one.  While the development of more
compact and efficient electrical energy storage means will continue
regardless of what the automakers do (the auto industry is a relatively
small battery market right now and does very little of the research into
new cells), different forms of propulsion should be explored.

Fuel cell technology was all the rage a few years ago when Chrysler and
Mercedes (among others) independently were developing hydrogen fuel cell
powered vehicles.  Just like batteries, the technology hasn't reached a
level where it could feasibly applied to a production vehicle.  Unlike
batteries, however, the technology shows promise as a clean, efficient
means of generating electrical power.  To compare it to the Hindenburg is
silly, of course - the Hindenburg was one of hundreds of dirigibles at the
time which used a hydrogen filled structure.  The Hindenburg was unique in
that it was coated with a high-resistance protective coating which allowed
a static charge to build up on the outside of the blimp.  Hydrogen became
the unfortunate martyr in this accident and has had a bad reputation ever
since.

Dismissing new technologies as not being worthwhile because of teething
problems and deveopment difficulties is ludicrous.  It is this kind of
thinking that has limited the development of the rotary engine thus far.
How far do you think the technology would have progressed if GM, Mercedes
et al would have continued their research into such a motor?  Ultimately it
came down to the fact that the cost of pursuing a new technology was not
worth the risk when existing platforms worked "okay."  Personally, I'm not
a big fan of things working "okay."

<getting off the soapbox>.

John Vitamvas

I agree that automotive companies exploring new technologies is a good
thing.  If they do this becuase they wish to be the "best equipped" to
deal with the Al Gore patrol I don't agree.  The job of the government
is NOT to direct the market.  Their engineering departments are simply
catering to our governments ideas of what is best for "The American
People."  The money spent developing these cars that nobody wants could
be used to further development cars that people DO want to buy.

In a competitive market (One that is not affected by government
regulations.) the auto manufacturers will not settle for something that
works "okay."  If they do, their competition will come up with something
better and take a piece of their market share.  It is plain old
competition that motivates businesses to build a better product.  When
the "new technology" is the result of government direction, you get
products like the the GM electric turd which no-one will buy.  This
piece of junk was partially funded by government grants.  "Government
Grant" is a euphamism for MY F@#%&+? MONEY.  And yours too!  Everyone on
this list helped pay for that thing!

PY

 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.

http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org