Wow that guy made the video annoying to watch. It is a shame he hasn't watched other R/C planes, he might learn that those modern electric motors can generate so much thrust that the body wouldnt even be needed. You would have to try very very hard and add a ton of weight to make a battery powered plane that couldn't fly. And when I say fly I mean "dragged along by a horizontal helicopter blade".

Excellent.

"The problem is that very dangerous people have very easy access to very dangerous weapons."

So, there's 3 issues there. Address any ONE of the three, and things would get better. Maybe not "job done" better, but better. Take moderate, corrective steps on all three, and we'd be MUCH better off.

1) Dangerous people. How could we take dangerous people out of the equation? Background checks. Licensing. Revoking gun ownership privileges for convicts and people diagnosed with mental health problems.

2) Easy access. What could we do better to sensibly and fairly restrict access to firearms? Well, lets see ... fucking anything stands a better chance of working than the nothing that we're doing now. So again, background checks, licensing, registration. Enforcement of said requirements.

3) Dangerous weapons. I think a legitimate criticism of "the left"s typical stance on gun control is that they might be a bit TOO focused on this one.
There is some core truth to the NRA harping "guns don't kill people, people kill people." If a murderous psycho decides that they want to kill a bunch of people, they can find ways of doing it that don't necessarily require guns.
However, it is also true that easy access to weapons designed for war can escalate the degree of tragedy quickly.

Basically, this one and #2 are a trade-off. Bolt action rifles and shotguns might be OK with fewer restrictions. Semi-automatic? High capacity? Doesn't it make sense at some point to at least be a bit careful about who we allow unfettered access to these things?


Trump's parroting of the NRA plan to put MORE guns in schools would be laugh out loud stupid if it wasn't guaranteed to end in tragedy rather than comedy. I can't fathom how anyone, even the nuttiest of gun nuts, could think that is a good idea. And I'm actually rather pro-gun. But, c'mon ... some limitations and restrictions just make obvious sense.

A car is a much better and more legitimate general-purpose "tool" than a firearm. But improper use is dangerous and potentially deadly, so we take some common sense steps to try to limit that. Want to drive? Get a license. Pass a safety test. Pass physical and medical tests to show that you are capable of controlling the vehicle. Periodically re-test to stay current. And, expect to LOSE your license if you drive irresponsibly (drunk, moving violations, etc.).

I don't think those are unfair requirements to be granted the privilege of a license to drive a motor vehicle. To me anybody that has a proper respect for the utility of a firearm, and also a respect for the damage that improper use of firearms can do, should be in favor of sensible restrictions and limitations placed on the privilege of being allowed to own and use a firearm, just like we accept for cars.

So wait...he talks about how important the weight is because it determines the load that can be carried. He does the weight calculations and then immediately starts talking about the cost of the truck and never finishes his weight analysis.

According to his estimation, the weight of the unloaded truck with trailer is 7 tons. If the batteries on a 500 mile truck weigh 8 tons then the total 15 ton vehicle is lighter than the ~17 ton average for a standard semi with trailer. I'd round up for the weight of the motors and since his empty weight calculation seems a tad low. So you can assume the weights of a Tesla truck and stardard truck are at least within spitting distance of each other.

Range is less of an issue since a driver is only allowed to drive a maximum of 11 hours in a 14 hour period. So assuming they drove a solid 11 hours at 60 miles per hour (since that's what the 500 mile range is based on), the standard truck can drive 160 miles further. But if you're driving 11 hours without a break, you're an idiot. And Tesla indicates that a battery can fully charge in under 30 minutes.

Last point, he estimates the battery cost alone will be $108K and $180K but Tesla has set the expected price of the actual trucks as $150K and $180K. Considering a traditional truck runs $80K - $150K, it seems the return on investment for a Tesla truck might be shorter than a traditional truck, given the economy of electric compared fossil fuel.

Great video though. Love all the math.

I did qualify it in my part of the description! The Benz Patent Motor car was still pretty early, predating volume production of either electric or steam cars (in the modern sense of passenger vehicles) which both took off in the 1890s.

Naw, that's totally a boat motor.

Nice. They must have built that motor (and trans) with this in mind...dry sump, front pickup, huge external reservoir....or it probably would have seized being vertical that long.
*quality driving

The guy in the motor grater jumps out while it's still rolling backwards and it blocks the other two cars from making it out. That sucks.

Needs a fan with motor speed keyed to the apparent slide velocity blowing at her

From reddit post

Policeman: "You do not have any identification right? - Where are you from?"

Driver: "I'm from Elamari" (? not sure what town/city he actually says).

Policeman: "Okay, you're with this other group that's here right?"

Driver: "The other buggy like this?"

Policeman: "Yes."

Driver: "Yes I brought it with me..." - (interrupted)

Policeman: "Alright, listen. I appreciate that you're here. But we're done. I've got orders(?)"

Driver: "Alright."

Policeman: "Youre not to be operating this vehicle on the road."

Driver: "Alright."

Policeman: "You understand that?"

Driver: "Yes sir."

Policeman: "If I see you around here, like I told the other guy (i'll have your vehicle?) impounded. You're operating an unregistered motor vehicle. No insurance with this. I appreciate you guys came down here wanting to help today. Our orders are to come down (no idea what he says here) So go somewhere else today, get out of here. Okay?

Policeman: "Thanks for your help today."

Driver: "Next time don't yell."

Policeman: "Have a safe trip."

-- The rest is easily heard.

Thank you thank you!

It's got a cop motor, a four hundred and forty cubic inch plant. It's got cop tires, cop suspensions, cop shocks. It's a model made before catalytic converters, so it'll run good on regular gas. What do you say? Is it the new Bluesmobile or what?

If you can go to all electric motors, redundant ones at that, you can cut out a ton of the spendy maintenance that forces helicopters to charge thousands per hour of operation. And fuel savings are just icing on the cake.

Your video, When Top Gear tried to sabotage Tesla Motors, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Was the girl who was arrested driving? Due to video quality...unknown. Someone who was passed out was.
The motor was running.

The girl grabbed the bong, evidence, and threw it back in the car....on video....then made furtive moves pretending to both attack and run from the officers. She also, as a minor, refused to give her parents contact info, another reason to arrest and positively identify her to be sure she's not a runaway.

OK, I see, you're splitting hairs....driving while under the influence then....although I've smoked for over 30 years and never passed out cold on just weed so I'm not convinced it was just weed.

Was the girl who was attacked driving?
Was the motor running?

Can you prove beyond reasonable doubt that's what has occurred?
No.

Besides, I think weed is the most likely problem, given the cop repeatedly says "gimme the bong".

Maybe a variable frequency drive ramping up speed, combined with wheel slip causing the sound? I've never heard an electric motor make a sound like that.