upvote
Saw pictures of its undercarriage on Twitter and it looks like it well have been a empty shell of a car
reply
I saw the pictures but it wasn't clear to me that it was empty. I certainly saw comments saying it was. It looked like it was flat.
reply
There is zero rebound when it lands, that's a bit weird. I replayed that part a couple of times, it doesn't look like there is any vertical velocity at all when it lands, which, given SpaceX's ability to do this with much heavier objects should be no surprise but it makes it look as if the vehicle has very little mass. If the tanks contain 250Kg of compressed air (which means it is pretty much liquid) and you toss that out in ~1 second or so then you'll be near the end of the depletion so if the vehicle would be launched just a little bit higher it would slam into the ground instead of gently landing. There isn't much reserve there.
reply
Link?
reply
I can lift a 200 pound piece of glass with a tiny vacuum sucker. It's the atmosphere keeping that thing up there, and the 2" of ground clearance is what you see around the edge, we don't actually know what the distance is where the evacuation happens. For all you know it as a 3' x 7' plate underneath it that floats just above the surface.

I've done a lot of vacuum picking and it is surprising how large an object you can pick up with a tiny bit of surface.

reply
Could you pick up, say, a manhole cover?
reply
reply
That is very clearly not what is happening
reply
You're right. The McMurty is an actual car with a driver in it.
reply
What do you mean? It's the exact same concept
reply
I very much doubt the machine we saw flying was 1000kg+. It was either MUCH lighter, supported by cleverly hidden cables, or some other trickery. The dramatic lighting isn't just for visual effect, it makes it easier to hide the reality of the demonstration.

If there was a live audience anywhere near that stage they wouldn't have been able to use thrusters to fly something that actually weighs as much as a car.

reply
What cable arrangement would you propose to move a car in that way? I think it would be easier to do with gas thrusters than with cables. They'd get tangled in each other.
reply
I don't pretend to know the details of the show, but if it was actually doing what's implied I don't think the lighting would have been set up to hide so much.
reply
To be fair: it wasn't really flying, it was more "falling with style."
reply
More like jumping. It was clearly able to lift off from the ground.
reply
The audience wasn't that close.
reply
Man, you guys are nuts. Cables? really?
reply
Remember when Elon announced a humanoid robot by using a dancer in a robot costume? Seems reasonable that he would have some "technical assistance" to make his stage show look great. No idea if it was cables or not, but reasonable people can doubt the veracity of the theatrics.
reply
A dancer dressed in a robot costume was not being played off as a robot, and is not evidence of cables, nor is it evidence of a tendency to fake demos.

It’s strange that people need to convince themselves that this is fake.

reply
Well... It's Musk. He's been known to fake stuff before. I don't think this was fake in the sense that the gppp thinks it is. But I do think this is fake in the sense that it can't be done practically or safely outside of a completely controlled environment and that makes this a nice demonstration on the order of a Cirque du Soleil or some magician's act but it has nothing to do with actual vehicles.
reply
I think it was a real demo, but I share in the skepticism that this is something that could reach the market. How big is this cold gas container? What happens to it when it gets in an accident? If the car has dirt and debris under it, what is the risk to people/property around it when the trusters turn on?

10 years from their initial offering of the roadster, I'd like to see them release a well functioning, cool looking car. Why are they spending time/energy trying to make it fly?

reply
All that info is out there. The one that thrusts backwards is 200 litres at 10,000 PSI and takes up all your boot space.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/691843612950003743/15...

The one that thrusts downwards removes the front passenger seat for another 400 litre tank. I don't think there are any pictures of that though.

I personally would find it scary sitting next to a huge 10,000 PSI pressure vessel but there you go.

They will not attempt to make it legal to use on normal roads, but intend to try and certify it to be in a road legal car but only usable while not on the road.

It also takes like 6 hours to fill and can be used one time per fill for a single use. It's a party trick for sure.

reply
yeah... I want to see the crash test videos. If someone is driving around with this in their trunk I'm staying away.
reply
Just look at crash test footage of LPG or hydrogen powered cars.
reply
deleted
reply
Dangle the shiney thing to get everyone’s attention and sell the hell out of the very normal thing. This is basic startup marketing and say what you want about Elon, but he owns this skill, it’s why he’s the worlds richest person.
reply
I see nothing strange about questioning the reality presented in a highly controlled on stage demonstration of a literal rocket car.
reply
This is not actually the first time that this idea of using a fan to create downforce. It's been something that's been talked about and modeled for a long while and I think a few years ago, the McMurtury Speirling was released. That set the lap record at Laguna Seca among other achievements. The car is about a million dollars, and the fans are basically completely useless anywhere that's not a curated track (think stones, dust, wood, other FOD going through the fans).

The new roadster is obviously cool, but it looks like a practically useless vehicle for 99.9999% of the population. It's purely going to be a track princess -- with lots of extra weight for frankly pointless (but very cool) thrusters.

reply
> but it looks like a practically useless vehicle for 99.9999% of the population

Well it's effectively useless for 100% of the population. It's just that 99.9999% cannot afford an expensive, useless car. Some people can, though.

reply
There was a Fan Car in F1 decades ago. Was good until it was banned!
reply
At race speeds (say over ~150 mph), you don't even need a fan or any active mechanism. Just passive venturi channels on the underside can generate so much down force they are strictly limited in F1 because they can easily enable cars to sustain extremely unsafe speeds.

There are some McLaren street cars that use passive venturi channels which from their shape alone, generate more down force at high speeds than the car's weight. In theory, the car could drive upside down (if there was a Daytona-sized race track shaped like a ~30 ft diameter pipe).

reply
Yeah, it turns out that in very specific and controlled situations, using a fan to make downforce is great. It's also a very obvious thing to do in those situations and doesn't do much for you otherwise.

Imagine a normal car having to carry around the added weight of fans, COPVs, and the plumbing to make it work. And only being able to use those only if the track is clean and there are no other cars nearby.

reply
You actually raise interesting point. What if we could remove bunch of complicated suspension and replace with a simple fan?
reply
What suspension would you recommend removing? Are you envisioning some ridiculous Flymo-style car? I can attest that a Flymo lawnmower collapses onto the floor when its weight increases (eg with wet grass).
reply
deleted
reply
This is like asking to imagine a Hoover vacuum to have those fans. It’s silly because it would never happen. This is not a normal car. Comparing it to a normal car makes no sense.
reply
The Chaparral 2j is one of the most inventive and cool looking cars I've seen.

Not f1, Can-Am but yeah, I'm really surprised this isn't a more common approach to modern track cars. Obviously banned in most motorsport but I'm surprised with all of the one-offs these days that it's not more common.

reply
Because nobody wants to be on a road/racetrack with a car that will pelt the car behind it with stones it pulls from the tarmac
reply
It has pretty good filtration [1], and redundant fans. Some rocks aren't a problem. But, you can't be driving through LA.

[1] https://youtu.be/xkXvL8YCtIE?t=721

reply
You can’t drive it anywhere that manhole covers might exist, lest you destroy the car and/or turn the manhole cover into a deadly projectile.
reply
deleted
reply
deleted
reply
Really doubt that demo was on a 10k kg car. It was probably stripped down to practically a shell for that trick.
reply
> 10k kg car

Did you typo this? Absolutely no way it's a 10 metric ton car.

reply