Seems like a decent enough idea but can you imagine someone in a completely different country that drives on the wrong side of the road (i.e. the right ;-) ) and who's never seen say a roundabout, trying to navigate around Milton Keynes?

Or London?

And vice versa of course.

Agreed.

Additionally, I'm rather more comfortable with the idea of a programmatically-driven car than with the notion that someone I don't know who's never been where I am is "driving" me to my destination.

Not to mention the hacking opportunities that will no doubt abound.

It could be read either way, but the impression I had was that the remote driver is just for getting the car to you, and that you then take over the driving duties. Aside from its appeal to people's desire to feel in control, it would also make sense in that they don't need to hire so many remote drivers as if they were also doing the driving.

And what about the latency in the remote control? And the controller's tiredness/inattention from looking at screens constantly.

I'm not sure that I would prefer that over a meatbag driving (from the viewpoint of another motorist, not a passenger)

Think we're a long way from autonomous robotic cars negotiating the UK's growing number of so called "Magic Roundabouts". Even locals seem to have trouble with these (@ Hemel Hempstead anyone?).

Fancy joining the Roundabout Appreciation Society? There really is such a thing (in Britland).

I sort of like the idea of a handy little two seater beetling to your door, unaided by a driver, but what are all the cab and drivers of the world going to do when the robots have gone and "took our jobs".

I don't think many will want to or could become coders/web wizards etc.

And now most retail is moving on-line, that old standby for the rundant of retail is looking an iffy one to rely on. Looks like it's gonna be Amazon warehouse "operative" or delivery driver...

Hemel Hempstead's magic roundabout was the first roundabout discovered by my left-hand-drive partner when she started driving in the UK.

Wasn't a problem, though we did need to stop and get a new tyre...

(the trick is: don't think of it as a roundabout. Think of it as six very short dual carriageways each with a roundabout at each end.)

Driving in another country doesn't bother me much, lots of people do that with normal cars. What bothers me is the car being driven remotely. I presume it'll be controlled over the phone network, so what happens when coverage drops or even suffers just a second or so of latency? It's going to need a high bandwidth link back to the operator for them to maintain road awareness all round them.

I swap side to side depending on the country I drive in, not a real issue though to be honest when tired I make mistakes back in the UK that I dont make abroad where I am less relaxed.

However Milton Keynes is nothing in the roundabout stakes - you need to navigate the Magic Roundabout in Swindon (and yes, that is its name!)

In a lot of places (like Germany) there are worse rules, in Germany they cant be arsed to work out which is the 'main road' and which has priority once you are off the autobahn so you end up with some crazy rule about right over left at junctions with no markings at all... looking forward to seeing the autonomous cars coping with that

That door on the front reminds me of all the stories about people getting trapped by parking too close to a wall. (What does it mean, "reverse gear?")

I wonder if was just an urban myth?

It was done in Top Gear where they put Clarkson in a Bubble car (Isetta) which he drove around inside the BBC offices until he parked facing a wall and couldn't restart the engine.

Clarkson was actually driving a Peel P50, the smallest ever road legal car in the UK. It makes the Isetta look huge....

Is he still there? 'Cos I haven't seen him on anything other than Dave repeats in recent years.

Uttering the catchphrase, "how hard can it be?", Clarkson set out to make a better and smaller car than the P50 and came up with what he called the P45.

Shortly thereafter he punched a producer for something trivial after a hard-day's shooting, earned a real P45 from the BBC and headed off to Amazon Prime with his mates - and, I believe, said producer - for significantly more money.

I'm told he's still there, nowadays squandering cash on another "how hard can it be?" campaign, running a small farm into the ground.

M.

He's having fun with big boys toys on his farm. Getting stuck somewhere in a very muddy fireld seems to be the plot line for every episode.

He is proving what a numpty he really is. Yes, it is being hammed up for TV but he really is giving farming a bad name.

If I remember correctly, it was James May that drove the Isetta bubble car. They mocked up a garage in the studio, and he drove in, couldn't open the door and couldn't reverse. Did Clarkson and Hammond help him? What do you think?

Not an urban myth, there was some odd UK law at least up into the 60s, where a 16 year old could drive a 3 wheeler, but only if it didn't have reverse. Quite why anyone thought reverse was such a huge danger between the ages of 16 and 17 I have no idea!

I remember my farther telling me of one of his friends who re-enabled reverse but had a bolt he could drop through a hole and lock out reverse should he ever be stopped by the Police.

It counted as a motorcycle (motorcycle + sidecar combo).

The Messerschmitt was even better. You turned off the ignition, then started the motor in the other direction, meaning you had 4 reverse gears!

The Isetta also, had a Robesto roof as an option, so you could roll it back and climb out the top. That or ask a passer-by to give you a little shove backwards.

As Paul said, without a reverse gear, it counted as a motorbike, so anybody with a bike license could drive it, without having to get a car license. Also, the road tax for motorbikes was less.

Hence the Reliant Supervan, and later, the Robin and Rialto and the Bond Bug - they were a hoot, or the Morgan 3-wheeler, a friend of my father's started a business selling replicas (Buckland).

It was certainly possible. In the UK the law that allowed someone to drive a small 3-wheeler on a motorbike license only applied if there was no reverse gear.

I can recall in the late 60s a family friend failing to make it up a hill in his 3-wheeler (possibly because it was overloaded with people), we had to get out and they picked up the front end and turned it round by hand.

In a similar vein, are either of these cars? The rules for occupant-safety in crashes are much more stringent for cars than for quadbikes, and an early electric car (whose name escapes me) was registered as a quadbike as it couldn't feasinbly be designed to pass the rules for cars.

"an early electric car (whose name escapes me)"

Assuming you're talking modern era, perhaps Renault's Twizy?

Found it - it was the G-Wiz (rather older than the Twizy). It came to the UK in the early 2000s, before the big push to electric cars, and was very definitely a city-car only. Or, as per my original point, a city quadbike.

The three wheeled bubble cars were classified for road tax and licencing purposes as a motor tricycle if yhey only had forward gears. Add reverse and it was a car ( the same applied to a motorcycle and side car) so many had forward gears only.

Nasty bloody things then, and in my opinion not much better now.

Sinclair C5 anybody?

The Sinclair C5 was awful. Didn't even have a keyboard.

Nor do tablets or phones have keyboards these days.

Maybe the C5 was a glimpse into a far away future that we are now getting close too.

Now, where did I put that VHS compilation tape of Spitting Image sketches....

It would have been such a good mouse, though, if only they hadn't confused inches and millimetres...

Easy mistake to make and probably why I'm single.

I remember hearing stories about people pulling into their garages* and realising they couldn't get out, so I don't think it's apocryphal.

*the building next to houses that used to have cars parked in them overnight, rather than the boxes full of junk and chest freezers that have taken over...

...just buying the Triggo. I live out in the sticks, so not many people to ride-share with, but most of my driving is just 10 miles to work and back. Give me a small, road-legal, weatherproof electric vehicle and that would fit my needs to a T.

I suggest you take a look at the [1]Arcimoto FUV , from the USA.

It's like the Triggo, but without the remote driver business.

[1] https://www.arcimoto.com/

At least that has a top speed higher than 90kph - looked at the Twizzy but the limited top speed to qualify as a quadracycle means it's not appropriate when many of the roads near me are national speed limit; being stuck at 50mph means causing frustration for other drivers and possible accidents when they try to overtake.

"I suggest you take a look at the Arcimoto FUV, from the USA."

That looks cool....BUT, it's only available in the mainly "sunshine" states (CA and FL - and OR and WA too)...and I really doubt I'd want to drive that ANYWHERE in the rain...esp in the UK, where it rains even in the summer !!

(And yes, looking at the promo video, there do seem to be some "half doors" available...so maybe full doors are an extra cost option ?)

I was thinking the same thing. A brief look through their website and even the "all-weather" page doesn't show a fully enclosed cabin. It recommends wearing "all-weather" gear instead. Not really a goer for the Emerald Isle.

> ... Milton Keynes. The roundabouts for which the city is famed will be a test of the Triggo's ability...

They already thwart "serious" cyclists, most of whom avoid the cycle tracks alongside the roads, presumably so they can totter aound roundabouts rather than use the underpasses or bridges provided for their use. (Other idiots are available, of course.)

But beware some cycle infrastructure. Southwark Council recently 'improved' a roundabout on Crystal Palace Parade for cyclists under the Holland scheme. They ignored input from cyclists who would indeed welcome Holland style roundabouts. But instead put in a seperated protected system. So any cyclist turning right, as most do, have to unnecessarily give way six times including getting across two very busy carriageways.

But if they ignore it (and 100% do) by taking the vehicle route round the roundabout you only have to give way once across a little used lane. Serious cyclists tend to be serious about their safety. Well at least the older ones do or they wouldn't be here.

The really annoying thing besides the expense is that the rebuilding took months causing chaotic queues and diversions for four wheeled drivers who would naturally curse cyclists who just zoom past and then never use it.

Maybe Milton Keynes is a better place ...

Local to me is a new mile of cycle way. If they put it on one side of the road it had two road junctions and a few drop kerbs, on the other it would have 16 give-way junctions, drop kerbs every ten yards and be shared with pedestrians ... let's think where it was installed ...? Surprisingly enough, most cyclists use the road ...

There's a housing estate near me that was built 10 years ago or so. It's got lots of cycle paths but they *all* continually swap from one side of a road to the other, and force cyclists to stop and give way at junctions.

When visiting there, I *always* cycle on the road because it takes a quarter of the time, and it's also safer because none of the locals indicate at the junctions, meaning that it's impossible to know whether it's safe to cross a road at a T-junction.

As far as I can tell, a lot of cycle infrastructure is designed by planners who never travel by any means except driving.

As far as I can tell, a lot of cycle infrastructure is designed by planners who never travel by any means except driving."

I think you give them rather too much credit for being able to drive.

Near me, there is a steep hill which used to be a main road with a crawler lane. 20 odd years ago, the bypass opened and the road got down graded. The crawler lane got cordoned off and became a cycle lane. Except it only went half way up the hill, then cross sides over a new traffic island/bollard thing in the middle of the road. The "three" lanes of the road, were routed around the island to act as a slalom to slow traffic down, and the new uphill cycle lane thus got split across the two sides of the road.

Don't think I've ever seen a cyclist using it.

Nah...

It should be

As far as I can tell, a lot of infrastructure is designed by planners who come from a galaxy far, far away.

There fixed it for you

The Warrington Cycle Campaign has a "Facility of the Month" page. Here from April 2018 is a facility in Cambrigeshire with a bypass for the cycle track...

http://wcc.crankfoot.xyz/facility-of-the-month/April2018.htm

(Apologies - not HTTPS)

Is that the sound of the air ambulance I hear? ---->

Like the Renault Twizy, the Smart EVs, the Citroën Ami electric.

The concept of electric car sharing service was tried in Paris. Its name was [1]AutoLib'

It was an [2]economic failure . Now [3]most of the cars are rusting in a field near Romorantin . Very ecological indeed....

Is there a market for this kind of things? It has still to be proven.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autolib%27

[2] https://6-t.co/en/autolib-not-profitable/

[3] https://www.byri.net/2021/04/02/electric-car-an-autolib-cemetery-discovered-in-the-open-air/

@Potemkine!

My immediate feeling on seeing these, is they are designed to capture startup grants and VC money, successful uptake would be an unlikely bonus.

Economically and ecologically, better forms of mass transport make more sense than this rubbish. Electric or fuel cell hail and ride mini buses, for example.

12 grand for a town car that is useless for anything but the shopping? I can go shopping on my pushbike.

Fuel from air is a known and functional technology, in place in the UK (http://www.westbeaconfarm.co.uk/fuelsfromairltd/index.html) on a very small scale and functional in the US and Canada on a larger scale.

The fuel is created by taking CO2 from the air, water, a catalyst and a stack of renewable energy (solar / wind in west beacons case, solar for the USA plants). Thus it is carbon neutral. It can be used to power your current car or motorbike.

Why the hell are governments wasting so much time and effort on electric cars which will take 50 or more years to be half as good as a petrol car? Wasting money on immature technology that might work but would require billions of tons of scrap being reprocessed and millions of charging points installed. Electric planes are a joke - Rolls Royce spending millions on an electric plane that will fly 2 people 100 miles is not exactly creating a new 747 is it? And as for the battery packs for the mega container ship from China - its unbelievable anyone could be so stupid!

Fuel from air would provide ALL our existing transport mechanisms with CO2 neutral fuel RIGHT NOW with NO NEW advances needed.

There is only a couple of reasons the government is acting like it is - (a) the civil servants see a nice little earner and a new empire for themselves, (b) the new 'road tax' system is going to require them to track us using the road - so they will track every where we go the whole time.

Quote: "Why the hell are governments wasting so much time and effort on electric cars which will take 50 or more years to be half as good as a petrol car?"

What are you talking about? 50 years to do what? This isn't nuclear fission here.

EVs are already arguably and measurably better than a petrol car in almost all use cases. The only real remaining issues are cost, and making sure they are recycled/reused properly (especially the batteries). Decent range and charging times, which have been a real issue, and still are for most current EVs on the road, are now basically solved with very rapid charging (350kW+ is now available) and longer range (some EVs launching later this year are now hitting 500+ miles, which is better than many petrol cars), they just need to be rolled out.

Fuel from air also isn't a solution, it uses large amounts of power (far more than an equivalent EV, so puts even more strain of the power grid), and uses water, so not too useful in some regions. And this still doesn't stop pollution by the vehicles themselves, as they still need to burn the fuel, irrespective of where it came from.

"Decent range and charging times, which have been a real issue, and still are for most current EVs on the road, are now basically solved with very rapid charging (350kW+ is now available) and longer range (some EVs launching later this year are now hitting 500+ miles, which is better than many petrol cars), they just need to be rolled out."

Please remind me what 'Very rapid charging' does to a battery !!!???

I am sure it can only be used very sparingly unless you want your battery life to drastically drop.

Most people cannot live with the range limits and charging times (proper charging) if they have to travel regularly up/down the country. Also the extended range is only available on small/smaller EVs which is also a problem if you are required to carry people/things in your vehicle.

Conceptually, EV is a nice idea BUT the technology is still not there, or the infrastructure, or the buyin by the public, or the facilities to recycle all the batteries.

In a nutshell, oversold as a solution and still under-delivering as a reality !!!

No talk of the range for the vehicles

Plenty of talk about 'platooning' (playing follow my leader one behind the other with a driven vehicle at the front), yes this is possible - the Ensemble EU funded project is doing that but it is non trivial and requires more sensors and communications than are visible on the pretty pictures

Plenty of talk about robotaxis and autonomy... maybe in 30 or 40 years.

So max with the twin battery option on a good day is 200km, on a winter 160km (about 100 miles, enough for most peoples commute), but with a max speed of 90km (55mph) it isnt suitable for dual carriageway etc. and heaven knows what the range is at full speed.

It is very reminiscent of the old BMW Isetta bubble car which also came with 2 wheels at the back and a door opening the same. It is a Swiss company not a German one so it claims. Cant see a price and the configurator isnt ready ... odd really if its to be launched this year they dont know what options there will be.

owowowow much ggggranville?

Come back when I can buy one secondhand for four hundred quid.

""The idea," a spokesperson told us, "is you basically pay for them by the kilometre.""

I already do that with my petrol car. I pay for 200km of petrol to go 200km, I pay for 100km of petrol to go 100km.