"It" Gets Around (Segway/Ginger)

ABC News ^ | 12/3/01 | Antonio Mora

[steve-b]

The main advantages of this thing are: 1)it's more compact than other small vehicles and 2)it's idiot-proof.

The catches are: 1)it's too heavy to lug up stairs and 2)idiots are usually more resourceful than the idiot-proofing engineers imagined.

[MotleyGirl70]

One word: LAZY

[Guillam]

Another word: LUDDITE

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

This is retarded! Ok, so a few people and big businesses can use one, but that's about it. The government buying these boondoggles and everybody talking about how they will change the future is ridiculous. They are too expensive, can't do anything new, and everyone who wants one is just a geek. A rich man's toy, nothing else. Consider me unimpressed.

Now ask yourself, if this was 1981, how many would be saying the same thing about the personal computer?

[sam_paine]

Comparing this scooter to a caster...

RTFP! I was responding to spycatcher's following dim post, not "comparing the entire system to a caster:"

Two wheels gives it a turning radius of zero which is one of the breakthroughs.

And of course, a turning radius of zero is nothing new, look at any industrial lawn-mower which uses two drive wheels for direction and one or more uncontrolled, passive casters to support the weight! Zero turning radius. Nothing new.

You are of course correct, though: A caster is by definition an uncontrolled, passive device.

Just as the Road&Track people mount casters as safety catches on rollover tests on SUVs, so will this magic device in actual production, I predict. There will be some fall-forward limit skid or caster/bumper to protect from real world object or terrain collision or power failure, if not immediately, at least after the first personal injury lawsuit.

I'm a cynic, because God made me an engineer (or is it the other way around?) I do not detract from the innovator, I've just seen the actual design cycle after a product is dumped into the real world and made "idiot proof." (Take Dianne Sawyer's bungling of the device with simple idiotic behaviour, for example.) At production time, this product won't appear as elegant, even if it is fully functional and innovative.

Three points define a plane. -- Anonymous

[Lx]

1) I walk with a cane due to my encounter with a two wheeled device called a motorcycle so I can sympathize with your plight. So on that count, you're 100% correct, it could make life better for people who have major health problems. Since this guy already designed a 2 wheeled wheelchair, why haven't you purchased one of those? Since as you say you can't walk for more than a few feet, it's got to be hard to stand, too? It is for me.

2) From what I've seen, this device doesn't turn by leaning into turns (maybe the rider does and a sensor detects that direction), one wheel moves faster on one side to effect the turn. How is adding another two wheels going to affect that, passive castors aside? And since this guy's an engineer, why have passive casters? Oh yeah, the castors were only for stabilization, not for the driving wheels.

3) When I was much younger, I owned and rode a Schwinn unicycle and can tell you from experience that it was not very stable. Sure, you could stay in one place by rocking back and forth not to mention the inevitable competition to see who could ride backward longest but once you stopped moving, you were on your face. If you added his gyro system it would eliminate this problem but what have you gained?

4) You're not the only one with a disability. I'm sure you take as many meds if not more than I do just to get around but you don't see me attacking people who question its viability especially when it's our tax dollars involved in supporting it by buying it for government agencies. They couldn't use an electric (not the shaving kind heh heh) razor? Only this device will work for the P.O? and other agencies and warehouses, cmon now?

5) For your 155, see my 127, item #4

6) If you've actually read my posts, then you'll see I'm not attacking this device, just it's cost to benefit ratio for what it does which is really what it comes down to. We're supposed to design cities around IT? My, that's a little presumptuous.

[Tunehead54]

For the record:

I can't recall an FR thread with more whining, negative unimaginative crap.

IT may start at $3000 but the price should come down rapidly with mass production techniques. Nobody has mentioned that whatever is in the thing can't cost more than $300 in materials cost.

This could solve a lot problems with mass transit. High speed rail to hubs and then grab your IT from a locker to get to work.

The mobility this offers for the aging baby-boomers and disabled is revolutionary.

This is the "Model A" - the first. I'm sure they will not be able to improve it in any way shape, form or cost. Right.

Thanks for the post.

[Protagoras]

It doesn't matter how clever the design is, you can't violate physical principles.

Would it be safe to say that you think that this whole thing is false advertising?

[spycatcher]

You're stretching your imagination. Your "extra wheels are better" design is superfluous to the more compact elegant 2 wheel design that rotates around it's center axis. You have too many ground contact points and will need more power to overcome the friction. And you will need even more power because you can't use your body lean to generate force. No way is it more efficient. You say you're an engineer?

[PBRSTREETGANG]

"It" a/k/a "Ginger" a/k/a Segway a/k/a...

has some uses for specialized situations.

Will it utterly change the way we live?

I think not.

[spycatcher]

You can't tip over something with three (non-colinear) wheels, short of bodily lifting it off the ground.

Forgive me for having a little fun, but say, do you perchance live in a cave in Afghanistan? And might your security force drives our old three wheel ATV's? Well, here in the US they aren't sold anymore. Why? Because they tipped over and killed all their owners -- that's how you got yours.

"Our machines will rip the bones from your back, it's a deathtrap, a suicide rap, gotta get out while you're young, cause champs like us, baby we were born to bomb"

[baseballfanjm]

I don't think it's such a huge deal. It's hardly the revolutionary product the maker says it is. It definitely won't replace the car as it only carries one person.

[discostu]

3 wheel ATC were the victims of lawyer. Like any off road vehicle it was put through some serious abuse by it's owner. The infamous tipping problem happened only in the even of jumping and landing incorrectly (front wheel first with wieght unbalance laterally). Which, if you'll look at his original post would pretty easily qualify for bodily picking it up. One of the other causes was hitting uneven terrain at too high a speed, the 4 wheel ATVs still have that problem though not as much because the two steering wheels makes it easier to drive yourself off of an over tilt. ATCs did not just tip over as you indicated, they tipped because of driver errors in handling terrain too quickly.

It's really a simple matter of physics, 3 points defines a plane and thus is the most stable way to attach an object to a plane. Obviously there's always some way to screw that up, but in your basic non abuse situation 3 points is the most stable. The problem with to points is forward/ backward momentum. Without the gyros for balance this thing would ALWAYS flip flop on the tourque plane (what battlebots, there's lots of two-wheeled killer in there, they never stay verticle without leaning on something, which is effectively what a gyro does). Which creates a problem in the event of low power.

One of the other problem with the Segway is the body position control. Sure it seems cool, no control surfaces to master a learning curve measured in seconds. But it only seems cool if you never walked around downtown Chicago during autumn. I've been hit by winds hard enough to tilt my body, and when I think of getting tilted by wind while on a device that will try to go in the direction my body is leaning I see trouble. Add crowded urban streets and buses to the mix and you've got dead Segway riders.

On another note this thing will be useless for the handicapped. Most people who have difficulties moving around the real problem is with supporting their weight while verticle. They can't handle standing in line any better than they can walking. This is a stand to operate vehicle, anybody that thinks it will improve the mobility of the handicapped is drunk.

Then there's the 65 pounds and major width. This is not a man portable vehicle. If you have any stairs to navigate you're SOL; how about opening a pull door, gonna be hard to grab the handle on your Segway, guess you could get off and drag the thing. Dragging it brings up an interesting question, what happens if you tilt it forward without being on it? That could get annoying as it surges ahead of you until you can't hold the handle then stops. And since it's wider than people you actually won't be able to fit as many of these on the sidewalks of America as you can people. And it's too wide to mingle with traffic on the roads like bicycles.

What we have here is some really cool technology used to make an incredibly lame device. And I realize that you're excited aboutthe tech, I'm excited about the tech, it's really cool. But you have to look at the big picture, how they put all this cool tech together is stupid and the thing is going to be useless. I'm glad one of the postal tests is in New Hampshire in January, nothing like a New England winter to test out a vehicle concept.

[spycatcher]

Good post. The problem with the 3-wheel ATV design is when it's combined with a rider sitting with a high center of gravity and various hilly surfaces and panic braking it's too easy to tip toward the front left and front right. That's not the case with 4 wheels.

I'm thinking that with the Segway, there may be those "issues" you talk about. I know they've had time to think of everything and test it themselves in all sorts of situations, but the real world and idiot riders (like Diane Sawyer) will be the true test. As for wind, people shift their weight into the wind to compensate for the push in the opposite direction. So the net effect should be zero, but there may also be a temporary hiccup.

My biggest question is how it will handle curbs and weird angled drop-offs.

[discostu]

I don't think they have seriously thought about it. I'm a QA guy by profession so I'm used to engineers going all gaga on what they can do and having to be the blue meany in meeting and tell them that while their idea is technically fascinating the usability is less than nil and they should think of something useful rather than nifty. To me Segway has all the earmarks of nifty beating our useful. As has already been discussed in other places if you put more wheels (I'd use a caster in the back and a controlable steering wheel in front, I'm into max safety) and put all the control on the handle bars what you'd have is something with (admittedly) less gee whiz effect but the actual potential to be useful, and a lot cheaper.

As for the wind, all I can say is you've never dealt with Chicago wind. In the short time I was there I was knocked down, pushed around and skidded by the wind (that was fun, leaning real good, too much ice on the sidewalk, slid backwards right into a mailbox). You might try to lean forward but you can't the wind is too buff. Saw a guy once with an art portfolio (BIG folder to us normal folks) that caught the wind just wrong and it actually picked him up off the ground, only a foot or so (shoved him about 6 feet backwards while he was in the air). Any of those kind of forces while on something that responds to your shifting weight will be quite amusing to watch, no fun at all to be in the middle of. And Chicago isn't the only place that get's that kind of wind, it's just the only place that's proud of it. Most coastal areas and some desert places will get some serious winds, not as often but just as intense.

[spycatcher]

Damn that's some serious wind. I agree, it may not work in that. But, if there's a more efficient design, people are going to try to market it as a cheaper knock off. May the best design win.

I would bet anything that Kamen already has another lab version of this (2/4 wheels) that goes up stairs and curbs just like his 6-wheel iBot. This one could probably go strait off a curb, and through small potholes, but that's it.

Any low-tech three wheel design would be a total mess with curbs, potholes, etc. And of course it could never navigate stairs.

[sam_paine]

You have too many ground contact points and will need more power to overcome the friction.

Why do you take this so personal??? Try this:

1) You claimed that "zero turning radius" was one of the new innovations here.

And I merely reminded you (and Bad Back Joe) that a zero turning radius is not new. See any moving dolly with casters...or, see the 1896 Manual Reel Mower with "zero turning radius."

2) You claim I advocate "more wheels is better." .

No, I claim that three points define a plane. (Can't wait to hear you argue that one!) I do however insist that a practical real world production model will include a mechanical, failsafe longitudinal safety bumper/caster to protect idiots from running into curbs head-on at 17mph. If they don't, Personal Injury lawyers will design it for them, and that will be ugly.

3) You claim that such a caster would create some inordinate amount of friction.

No, I didn't even suggest that in normal operation such bumper/skid/caster would even touch the ground. It would merely have to protect the device from hitting anything beyond the maximum vehicle entry or exit angles. Look under any car for the skid plate and see if they trust users to avoid curbs and rocks.

Besides, if your powerplant can't withstand the extra rolling resistance of a hard-rubber caster with ball bearings, then you're really going to have trouble powering 12" pneumatic tires with DC motors with brushes and bushings and planetary gear reduction!!

And yes, as Rush has, I have been loaned talent from God to be an engineer.

[VaBthang4]

Cool graphics...I've seen them both in action. How about you?

Anyway...you seem to have missed my request:
Perhaps you could show us all the virtuous pros of being a blowhard putz who weaves in and out of his skewed language bent on driving home the endless possibilities of a liberal fantasy versus one of the US Marines attached to the 15 MEU/SOC [Grunts] currently positioned outside of Kandahar Risking their lives to defend our nation?

:o)

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

AHHHH FINALLY THE PRODUCT FOR PEOPLE TO DAMN LAZY TO WALK

UP NEXT THE MACHINE THAT WIPES YOUR BACKSIDE FILM AT 11

[Zon]

The moped industry was destroyed by these laws and I don't see how this device can circumvent them.

This is all too common and you can see how it relates to several other laws and regulations that congress creates in order to justify their parasitical livelihoods and unearned paychecks.

A million mopeds were sold before the government began regulating/licensing/registering requirements of the end user/owner. The manufacturer already had the government breathing down its neck like every other industry. The parasites/politicians allow the field/industry to gain a strong enough foothold to survive the government onslaught.

Then the politicians and bureaucrats swooped in with a vote and the stroke of the pen and began sucking value from the moped industry. The values they suck out can be seen in the cost of owning the moped. The value/money they drain from moped owner is greater than the value of the protection the new regulation/law gives in return. Which is but one major reason why politicians and bureaucrats rightful earned the parasite label.

How long can the host/citizens survive the parasites sucking more and more values from them? Like struggling to ride a bicycle uphill into a head-wind, when the parasites are stripped of their power to suck value from citizens and society is akin to the bicycle rider cresting the top of the hill and taking the free-wheeling ride down the other side.

The experience and values for citizens and society will be like a new industrial revolution compressed into one tenth the time as the last one. And that will natural flourish from the current level of technology which is light years more advanced than when the Industrial Revolution began 240 years ago in Belgium. Well, maybe not light years ahead. After all, they did have the printing press and bicycle but not the steam engine.