h a l f b a k e r yRomantic, but doomed to fail.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
On both sides of the vehicle, angled slightly upwards, are cylinders of water. At the front end they have an array of tiny nozzles and a thin membrane. At the other is a piston, and an electrically-initiated propellant charge. They are solidly attached to the vehicle's structure, for reasons that will
become clear.
If the system detects that the ABS has activated for several seconds but the vehicle is still approaching another object dangerously fast, the propellant fires.
The resulting backblast - akin to a recoilless rifle - slows the vehicle, forces the front wheels harder onto the road, and helps to reduce the risk of post-crash fire.
Optionally, the driver can apply the parking brake and then press the button marked "Ooops ! " to drench pedestrians, or even knock them over if they're close enough.
Agent-initiated vehicle re-vectoring.
https://www.youtube...watch?v=cL1R77uPFEA
Kinda like that but with water? [Letsbuildafort, Apr 26 2016]
[link]
|
| |
//If the system detects that the ABS has activated
for several seconds// I think that if you are still
moving after three seconds, it is very unlikely that
any good will come of it. |
|
| |
"Well Officer, I was braking hard and thought I was going to stop in plenty of time but then skidded on the road which had suddenly become very wet..." |
|
| |
//akin to a recoilless rifle// except for the actual "recoilless" bit, of course. |
|
| |
Well, yes ... in this case, it's the recoil that's desired. |
|
| |
Carrying the extra mass of water and apparatus
would, presumably, produce the need for the
additional braking it provides. |
|
| |
Would it not make more sense to use the existing
mass of the vehicle, and simply use pyrotechnics
to
jettison the engine in a forwardly direction? |
|
| |
Or, if your body mass is sufficiently adequate, you
could save the entire car by propelling yourself
through the windscreen at high speed. |
|
| |
Jettisoning the engine forward would work best
if done by both cars in an impending head-on
collision. It would have less desirable outcomes
if just one car has this technology or if the
impending collision was with a pedestrian. |
|
| |
// less desirable outcomes ... if the impending collision was with a pedestrian. // |
|
| |
What, like you might miss them ? |
|
| |
// ...the propellant fires. // |
|
| |
Speaking of which, you might achieve better deceleratory
performance by using small JATO bottles (JATO Junior, 55 lbs
each) instead of the water. One could make a very flashy
arrival. |
|
| |
Rather than carry extra water to use for this, why not just use the petrol (gasoline) carried in the car's fuel tank? |
|
| |
We tried that, but then the UN added it to their list of Weapons Of Mass Destruction ... |
|
| |