[Hoggart (OP)]

My invention is a new form of transport. Absolutely clean and safe. I called it Urbamobile.
Urbamobile replaces the automobile, saves the environment and returns freedom of movement to people. The solution is here!
Urbamobile is not science fiction. Urbamobile can make your life better! Today!
Urbamobile is full automatic, efficient, and incredibly comfortable. Stay connected with the Internet on board. No traffic jams, no accidents or injuries. And no driver!
Urbamobile is a universal vehicle of the future, but it’s available now.
Urbamobile is round, safe, and environmentally friendly!
See for yourself and decide whether to breathe or suffocate, be stuck in traffic jams or move freely, have no prospects ahead or realize that human mind can overcome fatal despair.
You can see that URBAMOBILE means hope, opportunity, and result!
 [ Invalid Attachment ]
 [ Invalid Attachment ]

[evan_au]

A few initial reactions:
- The drag coefficient/fuel economy doesn't look very good.
- The ground clearance looks too low, and the center of gravity too high. It will probably flip over the first time it hits a speed bump
- Oh... and there's that little hoverboardy thing that we haven't invented yet...

[syhprum]

The silly season seems to be in full swing, let us get back to some serious science and technology.

[VIC]

A few initial reactions:
- The Drag coefficient /fuel economy doesn't look very good.
- The ground clearance looks too low, and the center of gravity too high. It will probably flip over the first time it hits a speed bump
- Oh... and there's that little hoverboardy thing that we haven't invented yet...

Thank you for "a few initial reactions" but to make it clear how it «looks» let’s solve a simple exercise:
Diameter of the Urbamobile - 2.5 m. Height - 2.0 m. The ground clearance - 0.1 m.
Question 1: At what height should be the center of gravity of urbamobile to be turned over at arrival on the speed bump, which height is 0.1 m.?
 
Question 2: What should be the height of the speed bump that at the location of the front edge of urbamobile from point-blank range on the surface of such speed bump the vertical, built from the center of gravity of urbamobile went beyond the area of its support, even if we assume that the center of gravity of urbamobile is "higher than you can imagine" - at the center of it’s roof?

Question 3: And generally: Is there a practical connection between the ground clearance and probable rolling over at arrival on the speed bump due to alleged "too high" center of gravity?

- “Oh ...” what is this about?

[VIC]

The silly season seems to be in full swing, let us get back to some serious science and technology.

Do not worry. "Let us get back to some serious science and technology" - for example, see post # 1.  []

[John-H]

The global road death toll has already reached 1.24 million per year and is on course to triple to 3.6 million per year by 2030! (According to Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting). Time for serious science and technology to do something about it.

[Hoggart (OP)]

The global road death toll has already reached 1.24 million per year and is on course to triple to 3.6 million per year by 2030! (According to Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting). Time for serious science and technology to do something about it.

This slaughter could be and should be stopped!

[alancalverd]

Natural death rate is about 110,000,000 per year. Interesting that road deaths account for 1% globally but only 0.25% in the UK, which is one of the most densely populated and vehicle-congested areas of all, with the highest speed limits of any civilised country.

[Hoggart (OP)]

Every percent means real people that loose their life or health in road accidents. And there is no technological solution offered to eliminate those casualties. But if the Urbamobile could be such solution isn’t it something we should develop and support?!

[John-H]

Road traffic injuries are the leading cause of death for young people aged 15–29. (World Health Organization Global status report on road safety 2013). I bet those people would have changed something if they were given a choice.

[alancalverd]

Mostly, they way they drive. Face it, under-15's don't drive, and over-30's tend to move slower, so we aren't talking about vehicles mowing down pedestrians, but drivers killing themselves and their passengers through bad driving.

But we are also looking at bad statistics. If you have survived to the age of 15 you probably aren't undernourished or suffering from a lifethreatening infectious disease. Under the age of 30, you won't be a serious statistical candidate for heart disease, liver failure or cancer. In fact there is very little (apart from war) that kills 15 - 29 year-olds, so "the leading cause of death" doesn't need to claim many victims to take the gold medal, and the fact that more young adults die from a voluntary, pleasurable and economically useful activity than anything else is, if anything, a sign of a mature civilisation. 

[alancalverd]

Anyway, back to the question. What powers this vehicle? What steers it and what makes it stop? How much CO2 is emitted in its production? If it doesn't get stuck in traffic jams, what have you done with all the other people (every vehicle in a jam contains at least one  person)? It seems to be considerably wider than a large car - how many historic streets do you have to demolish to make way for it, and where are you going to park it? And who the hell wants to "stay connected to the internet" instead of looking at real scenery? 

[VIC]

«In fact» - judging by situation - more and more «young» (and adult!) people die not «from a voluntary, pleasurable and economically useful activity» but from the foolishness. Therefore, it will be better for all if transport is not to be driven by people but by the System. And that, if you will, looks more like «a sign of a mature civilization».
For the car - with its unpredictable complex forms, tending to absolute unsuitability for any calculations and the need to maintain minimal spacing between different cars - it is almost impossible! But for Urbamobile - which round shape and some other technical features allow you to make necessary calculations of the object by single point, to drive in the simplest way and to move in contact with the other Urbamobiles – is optimal to drive in the System.

[VIC]

Anyway, back to the question. What powers this vehicle?

The most eco-friendly is electric drive, but the mass use of it in the cars is primarily prevented by the high cost of batteries that have certain performance characteristics, and the impossibility of «filling» the car by simply replacing the battery, first of all - because of the practical impossibility of organizing the cars in optimally managed system. For the Urbamobile these problems do not exist. Why so? - See the previous reply.

What steers it and what makes it stop?

Better to see once (or not once) and hear everything:

Everything should be clear.

How much CO2 is emitted in its production?

CO2 is not the biggest problem (take a deep breath!), more so, as it is known, - the electric motors produce neither CO2 nor any other harmful exhaust gases.

If it doesn't get stuck in traffic jams, what have you done with all the other people (every vehicle in a jam contains at least one person)?

There could be not one but more people inside, however, it is quite possible to place everyone individually
(See:

It seems to be considerably wider than a large car - how many historic streets do you have to demolish to make way for it

When it “seems” or “looks” – see the reply # 3. 2.5 m. - is narrower than a standard lane for an ordinary car. So there is no need to demolish anything.

and where are you going to park it?

See HOW -

and
HOW

and hope it will become clear WHERE – anywhere! – unlike the car!

And who the hell wants to "stay connected to the internet" instead of looking at real scenery?

At least those for whom «the fact that more young adults die from a voluntary, pleasurable and economically useful activity than anything else is, if anything, a sign of a mature civilization» - is not the best perspective. They would be obviously happily joined by those who still have something to do «staying connected to the Internet» instead of simply «looking at real scenery».

[alancalverd]

CO2 is not the biggest problem (take a deep breath!), more so, as it is known, - the electric motors produce neither CO2 nor any other harmful exhaust gases.

Making vehicles of any sort generates a lot of CO2. About 2 tonnes of carbon dioxide per tonne of raw steel, plus maybe another 0.5 tonnes in the manufacturing process. Obviously you won't use steel, 'cos it's heavy and oldfashioned, so you will use aluminum, which requires about 3 times as much CO2 to make the same vehicle. And then you have to generate the electricity to power your car. The cleanest way to to do that is to make a nuclear power station, but that needs concrete and steel: for the first 5 - 10 years of its life, a nuke is only paying back the fossil energy used to make it!

So let's ignore the weight of the elephant for a moment and turn to my simple questions. I now see that it has two wheels which are either tiny (in which case you need a very smooth road) or have been spookily eliminated from the drawing of the interior of the vehicle. The Segway works because the weight of the driver is transmitted through a platform below the axle, so it is stable. This means that the wheelbase must be wider than the occupants. I think you will have a job to make a stable vehicle narrower than a Fiat 500 or MkI Mini, and if it is going to carry between 1 and 4 people with or without luggage, you will need at least one more wheel to provide pitch stability without making everyone vomit, so why not stick with a Fiat 500 or Smart Car?   

[guest39538]

An ugly in dynamics version of the Sinclair, no different in design than a child's electric car, no one would want to make this, no one would to buy this for general use. However you  may sell a few to a few of the large fun parks, they would be fun to ride around park in like a glorified golf trolley.

[alancalverd]

When it “seems” or “looks” – see the reply # 3. 2.5 m. - is narrower than a standard lane for an ordinary car. So there is no need to demolish anything.

Any vehicle wider than 2.55 m requires advance police approval and an escort for movement on public roads in the UK. In the USA the limit is narrower, at 8 ft = 2.44 m, for most roads. This is not an urban runabout, more like a heavy goods truck or a bus, and would require similar skill to operate it. Passing in most UK cities would be impossible.

That's why we have buses and underground trains for urban transport. And some of them even have the beloved internet!

[John-H]

What has caused such emotions? The idea of Urbamobile - is brilliant!

[alancalverd]

There was plenty of emotion in the video clip, but engineering realities tend to interfere with such dreams.

I don't see why a large, unstable, circular car with magic wheels is more brilliant than the small, stable rectangular ones that we already have. If you add autopark (which already exists) and collision avoidance (ditto) to a G-Wizz or similar vehicle, you have an economical city car that any idiot can drive. If you don't like driving, join the other 50 people on a double-deck bus - no problem with parking, recharging, maintenance, or taking up unnecessary amounts of road space.

[John-H]

Engineering realities – see on the site about urbamobile.com
Urbamobile does not look like a «dream». The author finds the optimal technical solution to the backlog of transport problems. And thank him for this invention!