On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 18:49:50 +0100, djc wrote:


Umbria to London, 1,000 miles 56mpg in a 2006 C2 1.1 petrol, two
stops. And that was with baggage and 785 litres of wine aboard. I
wouldn't be wanting to do that in a milk float.

Doesn't 785 litres of wine exceed the maximum all up weight (and HTF do you fit
that much wine in a euro shoebox like a C2?)


--

On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 23:48:13 +0100, "Doctor Drivel" wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
I was reading spent Prius batteries are good for replacing a lead/acid
battery in a car.

No - far better to use an old laptop one. Would be just as much use.

Why is it all these electric car fanatics understand basic electrics
rather less than a three year old?

This man is senile.

You are missing the dash dash space of your sig separator.

On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 19:24:52 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

To charge 100kwh in 3 mins is 2MW. at 400V that's 5,000 amps.

But at 400kV it's only 5 Amps

All that needs is a bit of 0.5mm^2 and some insulation


--

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
John Williamson wrote:
The Prius does not have a gearbox.

It has an "ECVT", otherwise known as an elctronically controlled
variable transmission. It certainly *looks* like an epicyclic gearbox in
the pictures.



This man is mad.

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Doctor Drivel" wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:

BFD. 60mpg is what I got anyway Canterbury to Durham with a couple of
overnight stops earlier this year, in a 2008 dizzle C4.

Totally irrelevant comment

Completely pertinent comment. You're trying to tout 60mpg as something
special when it is not.

You have to remember he was claiming more than 60 mpg for 'his' Mk1 Pious
many years ago. But now claims all this progress. Of course he was lying
then...

Yeah - what sports car did he claim to have too ?


--
geoff

Andy Champ wrote:
On 18/09/2012 17:05, Doctor Drivel wrote:
Motor-in-hub will be the norm - brakes and power all in unit

Ever hear of "unsprung weight"?

Far better to put them inboard on shafts.

you can build a motor lighter than a shaft.

Andy


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Audi are looking into using a very small Wankel engine as a range
extender genny slapped under the boot. For the rare times it will be
used it is fine. Wankels are efficient running at their constant high
speed "sweet spot", so come into their own as a genny. The very small
size and no vibration is also a great major advantage.

That'll be why all generators already use them.

This man is senile.

The rotary engine has been around for many many years. Petrol engine
powered generators too. The need for a quiet smooth running economical
generator also in great demand - many pay a great deal more for this, over
a basic type.

But all of a sudden the Wankle engine is ideal for this job?

You really are the most gullible of idiots, dribble.

--
*When a clock is hungry it goes back four seconds*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
geoff wrote:
In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Doctor Drivel" wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:

BFD. 60mpg is what I got anyway Canterbury to Durham with a
couple of overnight stops earlier this year, in a 2008 dizzle C4.

Totally irrelevant comment

Completely pertinent comment. You're trying to tout 60mpg as
something special when it is not.

You have to remember he was claiming more than 60 mpg for 'his' Mk1
Pious many years ago. But now claims all this progress. Of course he
was lying then...

Yeah - what sports car did he claim to have too ?

DB5 or other exotic? His fantasies know no bounds.

--
*If you ate pasta and anti-pasta, would you still be hungry?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Andy Champ wrote:
On 18/09/2012 19:27, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Motors in hub are an extremely bad thing. Adds to unsprung weight.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsprung_weight

Not if the motors weigh less than the axles they replace.

I'm more likely to believe you than some. Is this really possible?


yes.

Not cheap - Neodymium magnets and enough silicon iron in the stator..

http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbycity/s...ner_Motor.html

is running at about 5bhp per kg.you probably need about 20bhp per wheel
for a small car (80bhp AWD). Which is 4kg per wheel. That's probably
about the same as an axle hub and CV joint.

Its definitely better weight wise to use a motor per wheel and dump the
differential as well.

The problem with an inboard motor is you need the CV joints (or a
dreadful swinging axle) as well. Those add weight and cost.

Plus you get better packaging with in wheel motors.

Biggest problem is you probably can't gear it - except with more in
wheel weight like an epicylic box. So it needs a LOT of poles to get the
actual torque you need. AND you need flexible and pretty substantial
cables as well

But overall I think that the best way to package a leccy car from a
'blank sheet' is battery under the floor to keep weight down low and
extending right into the axle regions, and a motor on each wheel.
The battery is far and away the heaviest thing so you want it low and in
the car model. The means you probably don't want transmission there at all.

Bernie Ecclestone has announce a 'Formula E' series for all electric
racing. It will be fascinating to follow. And see what they end up with
by way of battery swapping and getting performance out of the cars.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19402383


I'd want to stick the motors _and_ the brakes inboard on drive shafts.
But I know I'm old fashioned...

Andy


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
I was reading spent Prius batteries are good for replacing a lead/acid
battery in a car.

No - far better to use an old laptop one. Would be just as much use.

Why is it all these electric car fanatics understand basic electrics
rather less than a three year old?

Because if they did understand it better, they wouldn't be electric car
fanatics.

I got very excited after flying my first model plane on lithium
batteries. Did some calcs and got down to £27,000 quid for the battery,,
and a range of about 120 miles. But 400bhp was easy peasy.

Then I discovered that's pretty much a Tesla.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Audi are looking into using a very small Wankel engine as a range
extender genny slapped under the boot. For the rare times it will be
used it is fine. Wankels are efficient running at their constant high
speed "sweet spot", so come into their own as a genny. The very small
size and no vibration is also a great major advantage.
That'll be why all generators already use them.

This man is senile.

The rotary engine has been around for many many years. Petrol engine
powered generators too. The need for a quiet smooth running economical
generator also in great demand - many pay a great deal more for this, over
a basic type.

But all of a sudden the Wankle engine is ideal for this job?

You really are the most gullible of idiots, dribble.

The one thing you need on generators is the ability to run long periods
without breaking. Wankel engines wore the seals out in a few hundred
hours if that.

You wont find them in aircraft either. Nor will you find an aircraft
engine revving much over 2500 rpm. That way the bloody things are
reliable for extended periods of high throttle running.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

I haven't drove one, I was just wondering how it felt, is there a major difference between a electrically powered car from a car powered by gasoline?

On Sep 18, 7:24*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
charles wrote:
In article ,
* *Doctor *Drivel wrote:
charles wrote:
In article ,
* Doctor *Drivel wrote:
John Williamson wrote:
It allegedly takes a Nissan Leaf to 80% charge in 30 minutes.
The New Toshiba batteries can do 80% charge in 3 mins.
from what size of supply? *Certainly not a domestic 13A one.

Again....The New Toshiba batteries can do 80% charge in 3 mins. *Have you
got that yet?

yes, I got that.

Have you got "From what sort of supply?" *How much capacity have the
batteries and what charging current is needed to get to 80% in 3 minutes.

My car battery is 150Ahr capacity. 80% capacity is 120Ahr. *to provide that
in 3 minutes (1/20th hour) at 12v a charging current of 2400 Amps is
needed. *With a 100% efficient charger a supply capacity of 120 Amps at
mains voltage.

How many AmpereHours are needed for a car battery?

work on at least 25kWh for a little scootabout and 100kwh for a family
saloon.

To charge 100kwh in 3 mins is 2MW. at *400V *that's 5,000 amps.

nothing a bit of T & E cant handle.
Not!


More drivel fromTurNiP.
The traction battery in the Mitsubishi Imiev is 15Kwh.
The Nissan leaf is a bit more.
These cars are all about efficiency and regeneration.

On Sep 18, 8:49*pm, Andy Champ wrote:
On 18/09/2012 19:27, The Natural Philosopher wrote:



Motors in hub are an extremely bad thing. Adds to unsprung weight.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsprung_weight

* Not if the motors weigh less than the axles they replace.

I'm more likely to believe you than some. Is this really possible?

I'd want to stick the motors _and_ the brakes inboard on drive shafts.
But I know I'm old fashioned...

Andy

Apart from unsprung weight, the motors are subjected to all the shocks
from bumps/potholes etc. and water.
Only part of driveshafts contributes to unsprung weight.

Motor in hubs are available as a DIY hybrid conversion, ie you take a
normal car and add the batteries and motorised hubs.

On Sep 18, 10:15*pm, (Steve Firth) wrote:
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Sun, 16 Sep 2012 10:21:39 +0100, Steve Firth wrote:

And I can use air con, heated seats, headlights and windscreen wipers
without worrying that I'll never get to my destination. I can also
cross Europe in just over a day - that will happen with the Leaf.

Think there is word missing in the end of the last sentance.

Yes, you're right, it's the word "not".

But these electric cars aren't designed for driving across europe or any
great distance. They are for the wage slaves doing the M-F 9-5 25 mile
round trip commute.

Yes also true and for the same people who can't imagine that anyone
would want to do anythign other than drive to work which is less than 12
miles away and then drive back. The fact that such a journey will
*never* recoup the extra they have had to pay for the car does not enter
their minds. Also since they don't understand well to wheel the fact
that the EV will emit more CO2 than a similar sied diesel car doesn't
enter their heads.

Whenever EV makes say their cars will do the equivalent of 230 mpg for
well to wheel CO2 emissions they are using the mix of electricity
supplied in France (mostly nuclear and HEP) for their comparison. Move
to the UK and that 230 mog collapses to 40 mpg because of our dirty
generating mix. Move to the coal capital states of the USA or CHina and
that figure gets even worse.


If I buy an electric car, it will do infinity MPG if worked on a cash
basis.
I can charge it from my solar panels.

The thing is the price of fossil fuels is going to quadruple in the
next decade.
Getting oil from the Aratic won't be cheap.

So harping about fuel costs is ********.
There are just two issues, range and capital cost.

On Sep 18, 10:16*pm, John Williamson
wrote:
charles wrote:
In article ,
* *Doctor *Drivel wrote:
charles wrote:
In article ,
* Doctor *Drivel wrote:
charles wrote:
In article ,
* Doctor *Drivel wrote:
John Williamson wrote:
It allegedly takes a Nissan Leaf to 80% charge in 30 minutes.
The New Toshiba batteries can do 80% charge in 3 mins.
from what size of supply? *Certainly not a domestic 13A one.
Again....The New Toshiba batteries can do 80% charge in 3 mins.
Have you got that yet?
yes, I got that.

Fantastic. It took two goes.

no, it only took one. but you have snipped my question to you. Presumably
because you can't answer it.

As Drivel can't answer the question, I will.

Nissan and Toyota are part of the ChaDeMo partnership who provide up to
50Kw chargers for quick charging of electric cars. They need a 440V. 3
phase, 110 A supply. They supply 500 Volts DC at up to 110 Amps under
the control of an ECU in the car. They take half an hour to charge it up
enough to get to the next charging point.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Correct.

On Sep 18, 11:39*pm, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article ,
* *Doctor *Drivel wrote:

I was reading spent Prius batteries are good for replacing a lead/acid
battery in a car.

No - far better to use an old laptop one. Would be just as much use.

Why is it all these electric car fanatics understand basic electrics
rather less than a three year old?


And how many actually own one?

On Sep 18, 11:39*pm, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article ,
* *Doctor *Drivel wrote:

Audi are looking into using a very small Wankel engine as a range
extender genny slapped under the boot. For the rare times it will be
used it is fine. Wankels are efficient running at their constant high
speed "sweet spot", so come into their own as a genny. The very small
size and no vibration is also a great major advantage.

That'll be why all generators already use them.

--
*I wish the buck stopped here. *I could use a few.

* * Dave Plowman * * * * * * * * London SW
* * * * * * * * * To e-mail, change noise into sound.


Nothing stopping you buying an electric car and a small portable
generator to carry around in case you didn't quite make it home.

On Sep 19, 12:55*am, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
* *Doctor *Drivel wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
* Doctor *Drivel wrote:
Audi are looking into using a very small Wankel engine as a range
extender genny slapped under the boot. For the rare times it will be
used it is fine. Wankels are efficient running at their constant high
speed "sweet spot", so come into their own as a genny. The very small
size and no vibration is also a great major advantage.
That'll be why all generators already use them.

This man is senile.

The rotary engine has been around for many many years. Petrol engine
powered generators too. The need for a quiet smooth running economical
generator also in great demand - many pay a great deal more for this, over
a basic type.

But all of a sudden the Wankle engine is ideal for this job?

You really are the most gullible of idiots, dribble.

The one thing you need on generators is the ability to run long periods
without breaking. Wankel engines wore the seals out in a few hundred
hours if that.

You wont find them in aircraft either. Nor will you find an aircraft
engine revving much over 2500 rpm. That way the bloody things are
reliable for extended periods of high throttle running.


There ARE Wankel aircraft engines, I have seen them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraf...#Wankel_engine

The reason traditional aircraft engines rev slowly is to do with
propellor requirements. The alternative being heavy gearboxes back
than.

There are some more modern ones that drive the propellor with a
toothed belt for speed reduction.

But the tendency is toward small gas turbines.

"Doctor Drivel" wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
John Williamson wrote:
Most of that sums me up, except the well off bit. I can afford to run
the old petrol car I've owned for over thirty years, but I can't
afford the initial cost of even a G-Whiz. Which is a shame, because
apart from when I'm working, I generally drive no more than 30 miles
a day even on my days off. When I'm working, it's 2.4 miles each
way, but I can't carry what I need to carry to and from work on a
pushbike. Have you ever been in a G-Whiz?
I went in one. Fantastic.

But somewhat lacking in safety perhaps.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ror-smash.html

Tim

On Sep 18, 11:13*pm, charles wrote:
In article ,
* *John Williamson wrote:





charles wrote:
In article ,
* *Doctor *Drivel wrote:
charles wrote:
In article ,
* Doctor *Drivel wrote:
charles wrote:
In article ,
* Doctor *Drivel wrote:
John Williamson wrote:
It allegedly takes a Nissan Leaf to 80% charge in 30 minutes.
The New Toshiba batteries can do 80% charge in 3 mins.
from what size of supply? *Certainly not a domestic 13A one.
Again....The New Toshiba batteries can do 80% charge in 3 mins.
Have you got that yet?
yes, I got that.

Fantastic. It took two goes.

no, it only took one. but you have snipped my question to you.
Presumably because you can't answer it.

As Drivel can't answer the question, I will.
Nissan and Toyota are part of the ChaDeMo partnership who provide up to
50Kw chargers for quick charging of electric cars. They need a 440V. 3
phase, 110 A supply. They supply 500 Volts DC at up to 110 Amps under
the control of an ECU in the car. They take half an hour to charge it up
enough to get to the next charging point.

as I thought, you just plug in to the nearest 13A socket ;-)


That is for overnight charging at home using the onboard charger.
They all also have the fast charge using a fixed charger delivering DC.

On Sep 19, 7:54*am, Tim+
wrote:
"Doctor *Drivel" wrote:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
* John Williamson wrote:
Most of that sums me up, except the well off bit. I can afford to run
the old petrol car I've owned for over thirty years, but I can't
afford the initial cost of even a G-Whiz. Which is a shame, because
apart from when I'm working, I generally drive no more than 30 miles
a day even on my days off. When I'm working, it's 2.4 miles each
way, but I can't carry what I need to carry to and from work on a
pushbike. Have you ever been in a G-Whiz?
I went in one. Fantastic.

But somewhat lacking in safety perhaps.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...entist-killed-...

Tim

I think those problems have been fixed in the new ones.

Doctor Drivel wrote:

Have you ever been in a G-Whiz?

I went in one.

Did you wipe up afterwards?

In article
,
harry wrote:

[Snip]

If I buy an electric car, it will do infinity MPG if worked on a cash
basis.
I can charge it from my solar panels.

What happens if you need to charge it away from home?

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
Andy Champ wrote:
On 18/09/2012 19:27, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Motors in hub are an extremely bad thing. Adds to unsprung weight.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsprung_weight

Not if the motors weigh less than the axles they replace.
I'm more likely to believe you than some. Is this really possible?


yes.

Not cheap - Neodymium magnets and enough silicon iron in the stator..

http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbycity/s...Aerodrive_SK3_
6374_149kv_Brushless_Outrunner_Motor.html

is running at about 5bhp per kg.you probably need about 20bhp per wheel
for a small car (80bhp AWD). Which is 4kg per wheel. That's probably
about the same as an axle hub and CV joint.

Its definitely better weight wise to use a motor per wheel and dump the
differential as well.

There was a combination motor I once came across, *steromotor*?

I forget the application but the rotor was attracted to the rotating
stator field and able to *roll* rather than rotate. The actual shaft
speed was a function of the air gap dimension.

Lots of vibration and very low speed!

--
Tim Lamb

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
geoff wrote:
In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Doctor Drivel" wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:

BFD. 60mpg is what I got anyway Canterbury to Durham with a
couple of overnight stops earlier this year, in a 2008 dizzle C4.

Totally irrelevant comment

Completely pertinent comment. You're trying to tout 60mpg as
something special when it is not.

You have to remember he was claiming more than 60 mpg for 'his' Mk1
Pious many years ago.

I never had a Mk 1.

Yeah - what sports car did he claim to have too ?

DB5 or other exotic?

That I do have.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

Audi are looking into using a very small Wankel engine as a range
extender genny slapped under the boot. For the rare times it will be
used it is fine. Wankels are efficient running at their constant high
speed "sweet spot", so come into their own as a genny. The very small
size and no vibration is also a great major advantage.

That'll be why all generators already use them.

This man is senile.

The rotary engine has been around for many many years. Petrol engine
powered generators too. The need for a quiet smooth running economical
generator also in great demand - many pay a great deal more for this, over
a basic type.

But all of a sudden the Wankle engine is ideal for this job?

This man is still senile.

"geoff" wrote in message
...
In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Doctor Drivel" wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:

BFD. 60mpg is what I got anyway Canterbury to Durham with a couple
of
overnight stops earlier this year, in a 2008 dizzle C4.

Totally irrelevant comment

Completely pertinent comment. You're trying to tout 60mpg as something
special when it is not.

You have to remember he was claiming more than 60 mpg for 'his' Mk1 Pious
many years ago. But now claims all this progress. Of course he was lying
then...

Yeah - what sports car did he claim to have too ?

Hi Maxie, nice to hear from you. Fanstastic. Are you putting away the
summer frock now Autumn is creeping in? What is the attire this month?

On 18/09/12 23:57, The Other Mike wrote:
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 18:49:50 +0100, djc wrote:


Umbria to London, 1,000 miles 56mpg in a 2006 C2 1.1 petrol, two
stops. And that was with baggage and 785 litres of wine aboard. I
wouldn't be wanting to do that in a milk float.

Doesn't 785 litres of wine exceed the maximum all up weight (and HTF do you fit
that much wine in a euro shoebox like a C2?)

Sorry missing a decimal point. 78.5 litres. It's a squeeze to fit 15
cases into the boot, but it can be done, the other odd bottles go in the
back seat with the rest of the baggage (including the office equipment
as I was away all summer).




--
djc

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Andy Champ wrote:
On 18/09/2012 17:05, Doctor Drivel wrote:
Motor-in-hub will be the norm - brakes and power all in unit

Ever hear of "unsprung weight"?

Far better to put them inboard on shafts.

you can build a motor lighter than a shaft.

This never occurs to them. The link I gave to the hydraulic car had the
hydraulic motor (which was also the brakes) in one wheel hub unit, that was
lighter than a brake disk unit. 4x4 could then be the norm in all cars.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Andy Champ wrote:
On 18/09/2012 19:27, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Motors in hub are an extremely bad thing. Adds to unsprung weight.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsprung_weight

Not if the motors weigh less than the axles they replace.

I'm more likely to believe you than some. Is this really possible?


yes.

Not cheap - Neodymium magnets and enough silicon iron in the stator..

http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbycity/s...ner_Motor.html

is running at about 5bhp per kg.you probably need about 20bhp per wheel
for a small car (80bhp AWD). Which is 4kg per wheel. That's probably about
the same as an axle hub and CV joint.

Its definitely better weight wise to use a motor per wheel and dump the
differential as well.

The problem with an inboard motor is you need the CV joints (or a dreadful
swinging axle) as well. Those add weight and cost.

Plus you get better packaging with in wheel motors.

Biggest problem is you probably can't gear it - except with more in wheel
weight like an epicylic box. So it needs a LOT of poles to get the actual
torque you need. AND you need flexible and pretty substantial cables as
well

Have 4 motor-in-hub's, one in each wheel, will give the torque and power all
around.

But overall I think that the best way to package a leccy car from a 'blank
sheet' is battery under the floor to keep weight down low and extending
right into the axle regions, and a motor on each wheel.
The battery is far and away the heaviest thing so you want it low and in
the car model. The means you probably don't want transmission there at
all.

Spot on.

Bernie Ecclestone has announce a 'Formula E' series for all electric
racing. It will be fascinating to follow. And see what they end up with by
way of battery swapping and getting performance out of the cars.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19402383

About time. They will **** all over IC F1 cars once they settle down the
layouts.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

The one thing you need on generators is the ability to run long periods
without breaking. Wankel engines wore the seals out in a few hundred hours
if that.

Oh no! He thinks it is the 1960/70s again. Not that old one. The seal
problem was solved decades ago. The Russians have a design that has the
seal in the engine body, which can easily be replaced by removing a plate -
DIY job. This shows his age and state of mind.

You wont find them in aircraft either. Nor will you find an aircraft
engine revving much over 2500 rpm.

Pay attention at the back !!!! Wankles are good when running at their high
revving, constant speed, most efficient "sweet spot". Got it?

For planes. One constant speed high revving Wankle genny in the body, with
an eclectic motor on each wing turning the props. Maybe with a
supercapacitor thrown in. Simple and easy.

The US banned the electric plane. I wonder why?

harry wrote:

Motor in hubs are available as a DIY hybrid conversion, ie you take a
normal car and add the batteries and motorised hubs.

Where?

harry wrote:

The thing is the price of fossil fuels is going to quadruple in the
next decade.
Getting oil from the Aratic won't be cheap.

In Sept 2011 it was announced that shale gas reserves in Lancashire alone
can provide
the UK with an estimated 64 years worth for the UK. It never came with a
media hype of wonderment for some reason. The country was moving to phase
out cheap natural gas (which rose considerably in price recently), now it
will reverse.

The problem with shale gas is the fracking to extract the gas. A small
earthquake (a very minor tremor which no one felt) near Blackpool, where
fracking is being done, was blamed on the fracking process which involved
forcing high pressure chemicals/water/mud down pipes into the gas layer to
extract it from rock/sediment. Shale gas finds in the US meant gas prices
around NY dropped. I can't see that immediately in the UK, as they would use
it to bring down the deficit. They hope to have it on-line by 2013. Shale
gas resereves drop right down from the North, Midlands and into the the top
of southern England.

In Texas fracking has meant gas seeps into ground water. Lancashire gets its
water from lakes further north so no great problem.

A Resource & Pollution tax will reduce demand and encourage clean burning.
But it has to come from all angles to solve the energy problem.

1. More renewable energy usages,
2. Tax pollution,
3. Make appliances more efficient.
4. Smaller local (district) power stations.

Internal combustion engined vehicles are an efficiency joke - the makers
have done little to improve/replace these old crocks. Some condensing gas
boilers (furnaces) are up to over 95% efficiency - burning natural gas at
point of use (in the homes) is highly efficient. Having smaller, local,
cleaner, natural gas power stations, again is far more efficient as there
are less line losses - also waste heat can be piped to local homes (Combined
Heat & Power). In Scandinavia, locals stations are about 90% efficient as
the waste heat is used. One uses an underground heat store, to store heat in
summer for winter use.

We could be all electric, inc cars, buses and trains, using the abundance of
fracked gas to fuel the power stations.

Doctor Drivel wrote:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote:

Bernie Ecclestone has announce a 'Formula E' series for all electric
racing.

About time. They will **** all over IC F1 cars once they settle down the
layouts.

I'm sure TV companies will love it, 30 minute ad breaks while they come
in to recharge, rather than 3 seconds to change tyres!

charles wrote:
In article
,
harry wrote:

[Snip]

If I buy an electric car, it will do infinity MPG if worked on a cash
basis.
I can charge it from my solar panels.

What happens if you need to charge it away from home?

A long extension lead.

But it needn't be that long, as the average UK domestic solar panel
array will only give you enough power to drive about twenty miles per
day, averaged over the whole year.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

Andy Burns wrote:
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote:

Bernie Ecclestone has announce a 'Formula E' series for all electric
racing.

About time. They will **** all over IC F1 cars once they settle down
the layouts.

I'm sure TV companies will love it, 30 minute ad breaks while they
come in to recharge, rather than 3 seconds to change tyres!

They slap in new battery sets. Pay attention.

In article
,
harry wrote:
If I buy an electric car, it will do infinity MPG if worked on a cash
basis. I can charge it from my solar panels.

Your solar panels and associated control gear and wiring etc were free?

--
*Save a tree, eat a beaver*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article
,
harry wrote:
On Sep 18, 11:39 pm, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

Audi are looking into using a very small Wankel engine as a range
extender genny slapped under the boot. For the rare times it will be
used it is fine. Wankels are efficient running at their constant high
speed "sweet spot", so come into their own as a genny. The very small
size and no vibration is also a great major advantage.

That'll be why all generators already use them.


Nothing stopping you buying an electric car and a small portable
generator to carry around in case you didn't quite make it home.

Quite. And wait by the roadside for a few hours while it charges it up.
Making a lot of noise. Very green thing to do.

But why not just carry one of dribble's super capacitors in your pocket?
They are the answer to everything to him.

--
*You sound reasonable......time to up my medication

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article
,
harry wrote:
But somewhat lacking in safety perhaps.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...entist-killed-...

Tim

I think those problems have been fixed in the new ones.

Lessened, not fixed.

--
*When did my wild oats turn to prunes and all bran?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.