Good for Clive Sinclair, he 's thinking better the bloody car companies who don't think and still offer us the wrong type of vehicle for the now and the future.
For example, how many single people drive arounfd in cars designed to seat four or five, what about the width of those things and the space they take up on our narrow and often congested roads, every car takes a big rectangle of space even a small car, thats width not needed. Car drivers hate bikers motorcyclists and pedal cyclists why? Surely because whilst cars are stiuck in congestion which might be ten twenty cars containing a lot of people or just the minimum, the driver, it's ridiculous.
For example the road into my city daily sees congestion and because of the few roads going in it often becomes gridlocked, no one moving except bikers and pedestrians. One day out of interest walking past all those stuck cars I counted them and came up with 19 vehicles that were causing the problem and of those 19 only a bus had more than one person in it, so in effect aside from the public transport 18 people were stuffing up the roads for everyone else. Thats 18 people out of how many thousands, millions that use the roads. Congestion is caused by the wrong type of vehicle being offered.
But what is the option, a pedal cycle or a motor cycle and the weather and vulnerability that comes with it, do bikers cause congestion normally, nope they don't, do bikers crash into other bikers, similarly so it's the cars that are the problem. Now granted a family car transporting a family is fit for purpose, but a car with many seats transporting one person is ludicrous, pathetic even and a cause for our congestion problems and with that adding to the resource consumption and pollution.
But why is four wheels needed for a vehicle, a cart from the past, what is wrong with a compromise between bike and car, the three wheeler and of a design that offers a passenger/ load seat behind the driver, the tandem design and with tandem, a much narrower track and less space taken up on the road. What to power these vehicles with, well a lighter more aerodynamic structure requires less power, so electric is a possibility as is a hybrid engine, fuel/electric, but of a much smaller and enviromentally sound design. Pollution we will always have pollution whilst there is us, it is a biproduct of us and our industry, so there is no escaping that, but we can minimise it by using engines fit for purpose, the purpose of propelling a lightweight vehicle designed and built for minimal human transport
The 1950s Heinkel and Messerschmidt had an idea ;
But at least someone is thinking in the right direction, for me as personal motorised transport, this is perfect, it ticks all the right boxes but one, cost, it is too expensive and so takes status as a toy for the wealthy ;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPOkeJCiw9A
This is where I believe Sinclair should be looking, but at least he's thinking whereas the car companies are not, for they keep saddling us with crap from the past.
Did you know 40% of a normal vehicles power is taken up just overcoming the aerodynamic drag, cars are in effect pushing an envelope of air in front of them, that tome is a complete waste socars have not really improved that much over the last century or so of transport. Time to think differently.
