Slalom: a timed race (as on skis or in an automobile or kayak) over a winding or zigzag course past a series of flags or markers broadly : movement over a zigzag route.

Closed loop zigzag?

The first thing that comes to mind is how antiquated this video is going to be when there are no more cylinder engines because we only need electric motors.

In 2035 selling new gas-powered automobiles will no longer be allowed.

Automobile manufacturers have come a long way in protecting lives since I was a kid. I remember when an arm across your chest was your seatbelt.

Not so with drugs. They are more lethal now than ever.

Edit: You get a point for using "car crash" instead of "accident."

Hmmmm....do you think the same about automobile manufacturers when you pick up a car crash victim?

imo We've come a long way in a short period of time when it comes to vehicle safety, and i get the impression automobiles are going to be quite a bit safer in the near future.

I've been the cause of three minor fender benders in my life, and all three would have been avoided if i was driving a new fancy car equipped with collision avoidance gear.

San Marino? Iceland? Finland? New Zealand? Switzerland? Holland? Denmark? Canada? Possibly Sweden? Id give them a shot.

Funny to imagine that. Montenegro pulling the strings for once instead of being pushed away from the camera by Trump. Half the world scurrying to maps in vain, trying to find it, the other half not knowing what the fuss is about as usual. You will buy our goat milk or we will impose tariffs on your fancy gangster guns, automobiles and helicopters!

As superpowers go, the US is not too bad. Its a fairly hands-off type superpower if you compare it to say the Roman Empire or Napoleonic France. Taking a long time to even annex Puerto Rico properly.

Wondering really how China will fare. Give it 25 years. And they sure wont ask as nicely as you just did.

I'm curious to know what you drive the family around in now? Does it by chance have advanced safety and driver-assistance features (standard in Teslas)?
But you're right to be fearful, those dummies getting thrown around is quite violent. Automobiles are probably the most dangerous things we expose ourselves to on a daily basis. I've known more people that have died from auto accidents then from heart disease and cancer.

You are not even trying Need that scene when a car is driving on a roadway littered with automobiles and no one to be seen. Like the sifted video but with no people on the road.

(edit) maybe it's a bad idea to post lots of videos in the comment thread. I always feel bad when a comment thread goes on about something not really related to the video posted.

My bad for asking, Sorry.

Germans make blackboards out of multi-tonne slabs of slate I take it?

I've seen lighter framework for lifting automobiles.

Automobile rims too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISeA8ppZwlo

Pretty much anything that spins can be an advertisement.

https://www.amazon.com/OnetwoUSB-Display-Function-Silver-warranty/dp/B010M9KRHO

Ok, statistics class was 28 years ago....and I was pretty high by midnight. We both made mistakes...i still say that blaze chart is bullshit and intentionally misleading in multiple ways.

How many years before a 50% chance of cancer...heart disease, death by stairs...etc. We don't assess things that way, so it's just a nice big number to trot out and pretend it's meaningful.

Statistics can be used to prove anything, forfty percent of all people know that.

What if you put them all together, including suicide and accident, instead of starting by dividing into various gun death categories then choosing the least probable category to extrapolate? Now compare them to other dangers we strongly regulate against with evolving regulations, like automobile accidents. That's how these stats are properly used. Dangers aren't radiation, you don't look at the half life to comprehend them.

I'm a Love Actually kinda Christmas being. Planes Trains and Automobiles for Thanksgiving and I'm good for the year!

In Russia, if you haf $100k automobiles, you must still use potato phone.

***update -- I was wrong about P-47 having a rotary engine, confused *radial* with rotary. Other than noting that mistake here, I'll leave my original comment unedited below (in which I draw erroneous conclusions based on that brain fart):

@eric3579 and @newtboy -

I was also quite interested in the "advantages" question. My grandfather was an armorer on P-47 "Thunderbolt" aircraft in WW2, and I knew that rotary engines were used in those.

Both of your answers tie in to the strengths of P-47s during the war. They were considered very reliable and resistant to damage (sorta like a WW2-era A-10; they could take a beating and make it back home). And of course, in internal combustion powered aircraft, power to weight ratio is even more important than in automobiles.

So, I'm sure that some of those strengths were at least partially due to the use of a radial engine. Not entirely, because other things in the design played a big role also -- like the fact that the P-47 engine was air cooled, so it didn't need a radiator system. As I understand it, comparatively light damage to a liquid-cooled aircraft like a P-51 that happened to damage the cooling system could disable or force them down for repairs... Not to knock the amazing piece of engineering that the Mustang was, but for sheer ability to take a beating and stay in the air, the Thunderbolt may have been the best US fighter in the war.

A generation or two ago I doubt that poor Guatemalans could get fat, regardless of culture, because they simply didn't have access to the surplus energy required. This surplus energy shows up in nitrate fertilizers used for agriculture, powered tools of all sorts, and manufactured goods, like used bicycles.

It comes, of course, from fossil fuels.

A bicycle may seem a simple and primitive device, but just try to build a bicycle chain in your home workshop and you will see that making safety bicycles is possible only in a modern industrial state. It's not surprising that the development of the safety bicycle only barely preceded that of the automobile and the airplane.

The bicimaquina raw material is discarded bicycles from richer people -- nothing wrong with that, it's good, frugal engineering. But it should be borne in mind when plotting the future that hardly used bicycles are not a renewable resource, and require energy and infrastructure to produce.

Bicycling does give one a good appreciation of the value of energy. For example, 125 Watts is a respectable output for a touring cyclist; keep that up for 8 solid hours, and you have one kilowatt-hour. One kW-hr is a day at hard labor. A typical household in the developed world uses the equivalent of the labor of three or four hard-laboring slaves every day.

Of course, those slaves aren't the most efficient. You'll notice that the machines shown all use a direct mechanical drive. They could generate electricity, but that would cost -- multiply a few 90% efficiencies together and pretty soon you're getting nothing done by leg power.

Bicycle drive does allow good power production from human beings, and multi-geared bicycles are adaptable to people of differing strength. Not as much fun as flipping a switch, but easier than turning a crank.

It's plain that cheap fossil fuels won't last forever, indeed they may not last for much longer, and probably will never be available to much of the world at the same level as we currently enjoy in the US or Australia. Will we find ourselves scouring garages and cellars for disused bicycles?