Reminder to everyone:
It was the author of the book that started all the hype, not the inventor. The media ran with it, and blew it all out of proportion.
Kamen isn’t claiming, and to my knowledge, has never claimed it’s going to replace the auto. In fact, if you actually read the Segway webpage, he specifically says that it’s a compliment to the auto.
As for using it on sidewalks, well, most proponents have specifically stated that it would require the redesign of inner cities. You know, as in allocating space for ‘IT’ to run?
Look, get it into your thick skull, okay? In Europe, the Great Unwashed aren’t supposed to have their own transportation, they’re supposed to use busses and trains. Only government officials should have cars.
And guns.
~
Where did that “Segway” name come from? Was it coined for this invention, or did it previously exist? Is it supposed to be “segue”? Am I allowed more than three questions?
It’s not just the press that is hyping this thing as a sidewalk-mover and replacement for the car.
A quote from the website:
And lots of photos on that site show Segways tooling around in crowded pedestrian areas and on normal sidewalks. In addition, the company has already gotten letters of agreement from several municipalities allowing it to be driven on their sidewalks.
Yes IT has some practical problems that need to be overcome. Not all of the world’s population live in temperate climates where the Segway could be used as a viable alternative to the automobile.
[RANT]
It is a start. The negativity that has been expressed in this thread amazes me. Do you not think that Ford ran in to the same thing, what about Edison ? We have to do some thing to break this world’s dependence on oil. It is not a renewable resource and we need something. I am not saying that Ginger / It / Segway is the answer but most of the response here has been negative.
[/RANT]
Personally I don’t think that IT is practical for a large part of the population but hopefully we can use it as a spring board to something more practical for everyone. It took a while to go from Model-T to Mustang.
quoted from Canadian news: http://www.canoe.ca/CNEWSScience0112/03_it-ap.html
"A single battery charge can propel the scooter 17 miles over level ground, with each hour of charge providing power for two hours’ use, Time reported. "
I’m off to go hug a tree now…thanks
You’re half right, Rick. The heavy-duty version, which will be used commercially (Post Office/FedEx/etc.), does indeed weigh 80 pounds. The “regular” version, which will be marketed beginning next fall to the average Joe, weighs only 65 pounds.
Having read a detailed biography of both Ford and Edison, I can say that they did, at times, face this negativity. Often with good cause (such as Edison’s insistance on DC for long-distance power transmission).
The cry of “we gotta do something” just does not work out in the best manner IRL. The negativity exhibited here is healthy in that it helps to weed out the solutions that are not the best ones for the problem. And give inspiration towards prodding people to find yet a better way to solve the problem. This is part of what this thing that many fear, called engineering, seeks to do - to find the best solution to a problem.
Time and CNN (yes, the article is still up) implying that the device is controlled by “thinking” not only do not serve science, they do not serve mankind by their mischaracterizations of the truth. And yes, I know what they meant. But how many of our mind-bogglingly scientifically illiterate population will be able to tell the truth from the spin?
Regardless of the merits and abilities of the Segway, I challenge this factoid. I will wait eagerly to see if this is the truth - even on a level running track. Seventeen miles takes a bit of power. Of course, this is the same Time that still has on their website the implication that the machine is thought-controlled. And no, I don’t care who is saying it, or spinning it - if Time had one gram of journalistic integrity towards science they would not have printed that deliberately misleading statement.
I agree a lot of the negativity is constructive, e.g. descriptions on why it would not fit his/her life. But I see a lot of people who are so used to cars that they think anything that doesn’t carry 4 people and 10 bags of grocery are useless toys. We really do “gotta do something” and that just means giving every alternative a fair chance, not dismiss them outright.
Did people actually think it was thought-controlled? I thought it was made clear that the machine responds to your body language, and you control it by slight, almost unconscious movement of your body weight.
I don’t think it’s unreasonable. To run at 12mph you need about 200 watts, assuming air and rolling resistance is not much higher than those of a bicycle. So you need maybe 300 Watt-Hours of power to cover 18 miles, which means a 12-volt 25-AH battery. That shouldn’t weigh more than 30lb even if you use lead-acid batteries. Does that sound about right? Actually the Segway uses Ni-Cd or Ni-MH batteries so it should be even lighter.
Generally, are these types of power sources a collection of cells or just one big-ass cell? If they are a collection, then it would be possible to recharge each cell simultaneously to reduce recharging time. I bet they’ll also come up with some sort of long-distance model that has a little battery trailer that can be connected.
I don’t see this as making any major difference on the environmental/energy dependence fronts.
As the developers themselves admit, this thing is not a replacement for the car. It’s a replacement for walking. In other words, it’s an expensive, resource-and-energy consuming substitute for an activity that is free, renewable, and good for you to boot.
That doesn’t mean it’s useless–I’m sure it will be a godsend for the infirm and delivery people–but it’s not going to cut the number of cars in the US by any appreciable amount. (Unless, as Steve Jobs suggests, we completely redesign our cities for it. Given how few cities have decent public transit systems or bike paths, I can’t see that happening any time soon.)
Is anyone else reminded by this of the Hiller Hover Platform of the 1950’s?
As to “we have to do something”, perhaps. Ted Kazinski thought he was doing something to improve the environment, too. It seems to me that the key is to do something that is useful, beneficial, and practical.
“Six miles in half an hour” seems about twice as fast as walking, or maybe three times; in any case, no faster than a run. One hour down time for two hours up time. Price: Three thousand US dollars or more? Weight: somewhere between a hernia and a slipped disc. Weatherproof? Reliability unknown. This may or may not be on the right track (I am personally skeptial), but it isn’t the thing that’s goung to change cities, save the world, etc.
Maybe I don’t get it. Explain to me why —If I had the money and the desire to have something like this— I would choose this over one of the more conventional and less costly electric scooters that I can buy already.
I too am amazed by how negative some of the commentary is here. I have a feeling that much of this is a hangover from early press claims that the product was some sort of free-energy device.
Nevertheless, the Segway ain’t an Edsel. The Edsel was a styling and marketing exercise without a single substantive technical innovation over other automobiles of the time. If nothing else, the Segway at least brings a significant technologial innovation (its self-balancing system) to the table.
Smaller footprint, zero turning radius, self-balancing even at rest, operator just steps aboard and goes. That’s about all, really.
Segways will surely come down in price as development costs are amortized. Would one choose this over a motorized bike if they were the same price? That’s a more important question, IMO.
Still a good point, though. Electric bikes, which have similar performance to the Segway, and are a similar weight, have not been a runaway success in the consumer market. Why, then, should we expect the Segway to do better?
After looking over the web site, however, I remain impressed by how well thought-out this machine is. It’s really a rather artistic piece of industrial design, and there’s an unquantifiable fun factor in the way it looks in motion. So what if it’s not a monster hit right out of the gate? I think the operating principle will eventually see wide use anyway.
I think the scooter itself will be unimportant in 20 years. However, the technology it introduced will change machinery forever. The self-balancing system and its interface with a human operator are invaluable.
Good point, Ogre.
The same (or very similar) technology could be adapted to wheelchairs, autos, and other devices. Pretty much anything that requires input from it’s operator.
Besides, I know a lot of people who drive a couple of blocks to their local convenience store. Remember, you don’t even have to get off this thing in the store. You ride it right up to the cashier.
I say give it a try, and pass judgement after we see how well it actually works. And how much the price comes down.
Peace,
mangeorge
