chimpanzee

He & V** Racing are on my short list today (phone call), about becoming R&D partners ("Auto Racing", Empirical Research division). I would 1st introduce them to Martin (all of them are auto enthusiasts, & have the incomes to "collect cars"), & go from there. You see, there's politics involved. TM is under new managment, & I have to play it by ear. I need Martin's feedback on the whole matter.

I think Martin's next move should be RbE/"Roadster by Eberhard", a 3rd party aftermarket supplier of Roadster. Cool aftermarket accessories, incl Xtrac 2-speed (I have a line on a solution, Xtrac solved the shockload problem in Offroad earlier this year), stereo systems, AI (Artificial Intelligence) based HUD (Heads Up Displays) from Aerospace Technology, wheel/tire packages, etc. Martin is a car enthusiast, & Roadster fanatic. He is like the potential clients of RbE, wealthy successful professionals who want to accessorize/enhance their newest Roadster toy. He would know what to do. So, my above 2 friends would be directed to RbE as clients, instead of TM. See what I'm getting at?

Martin can eventually get what he wants (play in the EV area), while distancing himself from TM (because of politics). How I factor in the whole scenario (my vision for an Interdisciplinary Collaborative/Cooperative R&D outfit for Alternative Energy companies..incl TM), is still under development. Martin could advise me on this. My R&D thing could license Technology to "Roadster by Eberhard", for mass-consumer manufacturing/distribution.

chimpanzee

Well, this is NOT good.

Q: What was the recent crisis with TM?
A: a transmission issue (due to failure on TM's part to setup an R&D program, that would have "covered" them) that created an "employment issue". I.e., Martin & company (incl W. Rippel, Judy Estrin) being canned in the infamous "Stealth Bloodbath". That led to further production delays, & even Drivetrain 1.5 hasn't gone thru a Durability/Reliability testing program (whatever happened to the Death Valley test, back in Aug). So, the trickle of Roadsters has a "smoking gun" issue of another tranny issue?

Okay, I could live with the above if they made a nice recovery. But, to now hear about delays in "S"..this sounds like "same old same old". I guarantee you, this persistent pattern of under-delivering will cause great harm to their brand-name/reputation.

Allow me to reprint what was said on RCSE mailing list (Radio Control Soaring Electric, the same hobby myself & A. Cocconi & many Aerovironment engineers dabble in). There was a small vendor which was NOTORIOUS for poor customer service:

That about says it. AFAIC, TM better get their ship on the right course fast. Somehow I don't think it's gonna happen. ("It starts from the Top", as the saying goes). Maybe all along, the experts were right, a small company like TM doesn't have a chance in the bigtime industry of Auto Mfring (where a LOT of critical mass is required). Not to put down Martin, it was certainly a heroic effort for his initiative to found TM. Heck , it certainly "stirred the pot" & got GM off their butts. THAT may be the biggest legacy of all for TM, the "I'm the straw that stirs the drink" (quote by Mr. October, aka New York Yankee outfielder Reggie Jackson). Unfortunately, some unscrupulous characters were brought on board. THAT'S LIFE, scoundrels/sharks everywhere! I had my own experience in 2006, boy was it NASTY! However, the bad guys had a SPECTACULAR FAILURE according to the maxim "Cheaters Never Prosper". Like D. Vespremi (suing TM), I simply get a lawyer & it's a simple matter to recover damages for "Unfair Competition" (my case could settle in the millions).

Some finishing comments from RCSE:

How we all wish TM was the latter! Again, it was a certain individual that came in & messed things up!

I go back to the transmission issue with Xtrac & Magna. Man, these kinds of teething engineering issues always come up, especially in the "In order to push the Limits, you SOMETIMES HAVE TO EXCEED THE LIMITS" world of Alternative Energy. It takes TIME (that cursed word in Research & Manufacturing) to sort things out. An R&D program was NOT setup to cover them

[ Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft Index Home is a good example of a 3rd party entity set up to pro-actively search for such engineering problems to be located/solved, before they arise in Industry. As a matter of fact, I spoke to a German CS/Computer Science prof (associated with Fraunhofer) about my idea to setup a Interdisciplinary Collaborative/Cooperative R&D Inst for Alternative Energy, & he immediately picked up on it. He named Daimler-Benz, Volkswagen, BMW as potential clients. Well, we now know DB has some kind of deal going with TM, so that may play into.. ]

so, that cost them TIME. Well guess what? Xtrac is heavily involved with Auto Racing (experimental testbed for R&D): IndyCar, Offroad, Formula 1, Rally. They signed up a leading Class 1 team in Offroad as a Development Partner (whose owner's name is Martin, btw), worked thru severe breakage issues in 2007, & in early 2008 they successfully developed an Xtrac tranny that earned them a 1st place & 3rd place at the 2 most recent Baja races! The shockload problem in Offroad (flying a car in the car & landing it, tremendous stress on tranny) is NOT unlike that of the Roadster. So, the cross-pollination effect of Interdisciplinary Science has a solution for a 2-speed Xtrac Roadster. I.e., the Proof of Concept has essentially been done. Submitted as part of a NSF (or DoE or DARPA) proposal, this would go a long way in getting the R&D Inst funded. My involvement with Offroad (& pavement racing like Champcar) has many fancy mutlimedia tools, so this effective use of state-of-the-art of Graphics will also enhance the proposal. The latter 2 points: Proof of Concept & Effective Use of Graphics were named as key in getting proposals funded ("Art of Grant Writing", SIGGRAPH 2008 course). I've found a couple of key contacts, who have experience in Infrastructure Development (1 guy sits on NSF panel reviews, & himself got his thing funded to the tune of 33 million).

So, I'm pretty pumped I've found the Solution, in the Needs/Solution model for TM. I'm just waiting for Martin to get on board, or have him available as an advisor. Maybe, his role is to work with GM/Bob Lutz to get the Volt to the mass-market. You will notice that the R&D Inst has a *generalized* model (business model diversification), it targets ANY Alternative Energy company. Hydrogen power, EV, solar power. So, I'm covered in the sense that I'm not affected by individual company blowups.

I invite any comment/feedback by knowledgable TMC members (some with extensive business experience). I still have to fine-tune the concept, before I know what to write a proposal for. The R&D Inst would be located on various university campuses (UIUC, Caltech, Georgia-Tech, UC San Diego...Academic research partners), & also have Industrial Partners (GM, Intel, Fraunhofer Inst). Many of aforementioned entities have UIUC alumni (ironically, some were officemates with Martin & myself at Coordinated Science Laboratory/AARGM). My background is Research, not Business.

chimpanzee

Here's another comment from the RCSE thread about "Business run like a Hobby":

It appears as if the TM situation is not an isolated incident, but a universal problem that pervades all of Business. One has to wonder, where they would be if Management was "with it".

chimpanzee

No reports about the Death Valley test (scheduled in Aug). Again, like you pointed out, this could be a PR issue. It's been observed that TM blogs are woefully inadequate in maintaining "transparency". This is reminiscent of the Champcar fiasco (bankrupt CART proceeds bought by K. Kalkhoven .com'er), where it was totally mismanaged & the media dept "disappeared":

"if you don't control the Media, the Media will control you"

A LOT of worried commentary/speculation by fans (on Champcar Fanatics forum, the analog of TMC), & sure enough..implosion earlier this year: Bankruptcy.

I will say this. Knowing something about Auto Racing, I have smelled BURNED ELECTRONICS on pit-road. Being an EE, I know about this. What is going on is that the electronic black-box is subjected to severe heat stress (no air conditioning) & they blow up. Laws of Thermodynamics apply. You often see Indycars fail to start at the beginning of the race: I believe this is due to cars sitting around, getting hot, black box electronics failing. You often see race cars coming in during the race, & blackbox being swapped out (I remember Newman-Haas doing this to S. Bourdais' car, & doing a fancy WiFi software update on pit-road).

We are hearing about reports from Autobahn testing, where extended periods of running the car full-tilt are causing cooling issues w/electronics. Drivetrain 1.5 is a 1-speed that is over-revved & overheating the motor (requiring special watercooling). Heat is the enemy, it will cause premature component wear. So, heating issues are a concern, & although I don't know for a fact, I'm suspecting there could be a lurking heat gremlin. I've BEEN to Death Valley, it can get up to 125 deg there. To be making major engineering mods mid-stream, without full test profiling (isn't that what Engineering prototypes are for?), swapping it in to fix a failing component (2-speed tranny locked into 2nd), sounds awful dicey to me.

What is it..around 30 Roadster delivered so far? How do they expect to fulfill all those future orders (isn't it a large # ?) And, now they are tackling ANOTHER vehicle development/manufacturing program? This sounds like a classic case of violating the maxim:

"Discretion is the Better Part of Valor"

TM is trying to do way too much, too soon. It goes back to "it starts from the top", some guy out there has no Sense of Reality. His ex Physics prof (Univ of Penn) publicly commented "his efforts are diluted". He's doing this SpaceX (trail of failures) AND micro-managing TM into the ground? (driving out Martin, W. Rippel, J. Estrin). Despite the temporary optimism about some Roadster deliveries, I see NO CHANGE in the flaws with upper management.

I hate to say it, others have commented also, that TM has a real uphill climb ("challenges") in front of it. Can they be David, & beat Goliath (established auto mfrs, with tons of resources & "critical mass")? Well, they sure aren't doing the following:

"if you put themselves in a position to Win, you have a shot at winning"
-- Jim Valvano, head basketball coach of NC State Wolfpack

They seem to reverting to past behavior: "throwing money at the problem". Hiring a bunch of hi-profile people (ex-Mazda designer), & leading people to believe (on the surface) that there's optimism/hope for progress.


You have a point, there is incomplete information & speculation. But, read the above analysis, & you get a feeling of "System Gestalt" (German term from Artificial Intelligence research, about global organization) that they are not making proper adjustments. That's why I'm high on the idea of a 3rd party R&D outfit, to offload some of the engineering R&D off their backs (JD Straubel & staff).

I go back to the famous fable of Rabbit vs Tortoise. The rabbit starts off fast, burns out, & the Tortoise wins. "Slow & Steady wins the race" (similar to the naval saying "Steady as she goes"). I think TM is following the path of the "rabbit", trying to do too much..too fast. "Haste makes Waste". This SH*T takes TIME (that magic word), it won't happen overnight.

Someone in TM management is apparently in some sort of "Reality Distortion Field", just not grounded in Reality. "Some people have more Money than Brains". My training is in EE (same generation as Martin, we both did our masters thesis in AI/Robotics/Vision, same advisor), & my bent is toward being Conservative. Exhaustive Design & Testing (doing my homework), before announcing a "product". You get the feeling that TM is doing the equivalent of "cramming before an exam". Bad idea.

Given all that's happened, everyone has to ask themselves that question: "What do you think about TM future?" If there isn't an immediate split-second response like "they'll pull it off", that means there are problems ("red flags").

chimpanzee

I haven't had time to fully research all the press out there (due to work constraints), Re: Drivetrain 1.5. I do recall JB talking about how quirky the analog circuity of ACP's PEM was, & how they re-engineered everything to a modern digital design. I go back to my repeated emphasis on the importance of an R&D program

[ especially external virtual Interdisciplinary Collaborative/Cooperative R&D Inst for Alternative Energy, covering Academia & Industry..ala Fraunhofer Inst: pro-active search/solution of engineering problems, before they are encountered in Manufacturing ]

which acts as a "safety umbrella", which covers companies like TM. I understand there was a LOT of furious engineering activity by JB & staff, this kind of stress (workload under time pressure) increases Risk. The whole crisis last year arose from engineering pressure & missed deadlines, which manifested as the Stealth Bloodbath. Good people were ejected (UIUC & Caltech alumni), & the consequences may be felt for a long time to come.

"Go into it with a GROUP [ teamwork ] of people"
-- Dr xxx, Caltech CS professor

The idea of some organized infrastructure (TM & the above R&D Inst) is how Japan is so successful in its dominance in the Tech industry:

"America is #1 in Technology, Japan is #1 in bringing Technology to the Marketplace"
-- Japanese industrialist, early 80's (said to me while a UIUC grad student, the same time Martin was in our group)

In Japan, there is organized effort involving Govt & Industry (incl subsidies). Martin's summer '81 advisor @UIUC (whose son was an intern w/Martin that same summer at our lab, now is Director of Research & VP Corporate Technology @Intel) said "The Japanese use the tools so fast".

So, just look at "Who killed the Electric Car?". It's pathetic & depressing (I could see the resignation on A. Cocconi's face when I met him in summer '06, he was burned out due to infighting with Govt & oil companies), how this country (govt & certain Industry entities) shoot themselves in the foot.

"I want a Clean Solution, WITHOUT ANY INFIGHTING"

Maybe an expert can chime in, but overall I see chaos. Ironically, we saw chaos within even a small company like TM (infighting), which led to a crisis. The lessons learned, is that there needs to be better Organization/Infrastructure. High-level initiatives have to come from the top. I was just watching an ABC Investigative Reports from the DNC & RNC, where there were these sleazy Lobbying parties (by wealthy corporations) designed to influence political candidates. It seems as if direction in USA is driven by Politics, not Needs/Solutions of the masses (e.g., Alternative Energy).

How can any company (like TM) in Alternative Energy be a part of a new Industrial Revolution, with such flawed infrastructure? "It starts from the Top" as the saying goes, & someone powerful in Washington better step to the plate & do something.

The offroad racing is a REALLY "extreme duty application", the physical shock/heat/dust is unbelievable. The "buggy" (independent suspension, derived from VW transaxle) flies in the air & lands, the latter where the shockload to tranny occurs. It's not unlike the shockload in a Roadster, the sudden torque curve of the AC Induction motor placing stress on the tranny (also, in clutchless shifts from 1st to 2nd?). They had breakage problems (by various offroad clients in desert racing) throughout 2007, but this team has technical expertise (the owner/driver has a 4 yr tech degree from Europe). They do their own on-board telemetry analysis. I am not surprised that this "sharp well run team that is INTO TECHNOLOGY" has achieved success as development partner with Xtrac.

Getting back to your question, how would their knowledge translate to a 2-speed Xtrac tranny for pavement applications (e.g., Roadster). Racing hardware is designed for short burst application (1 race). However, even so, it might translate into longevity/robustness (durability/reliability) for street applications. Even, sustaining Martin's wicked style of driving!

That would be one of the problems to be studied, if my proposal (DoE or NSF or DARPA) gets funded, hopefully with Martin in tow. Translating the racing tranny to a street tranny (doing a crossover from Offroad to Street, that's Interdisciplinary Science). This could benefit not just TM, but ANY EV company wanting to do a 2-speed tranny for their car.


It's been said:

"there is no such thing as a bullet proof transmission in offroad racing"

I.e., both driver & car have their limits, & the driver has to know the limits of the car (engine, tranny, suspension, tires) & stay within the performance envelope. I.e., operate to the fine line of breakage & bring the car home. What's going on with that Class 1 team, is that they've developed an Xtrac tranny which is strong (but not indestructable) AND found a championship Rally driver (from Germany) who has a track record for winning races.

It's the well known symbiosis of driver + car, in the environment of a race-track. There was a famous Formula 1 driver (multiple season points titles to his credit) by the name of Alain Prost, aka "The Professor". He was famous for "saving the car" (especially tires) in early/mid stages of the race, & finishing strong late in the race. Another driver known for this was Rick Mears (cut his teeth in offroad racing, 4-time Indy 500 winner), who would always "stay in the hunt", & go for the win in the later stages.

The above Strategy is what TM lacked. They were trying to go TOO FAST..TOO SOON. It's the old fable of the Tortoise & the Hare:

"Slow & Steady wins the race"

In naval speak, they say "Steady as she goes". TM was trying to go for the grand-slam in their rookie-at-bat (I commend them for their go-for-it-attitude), but "Discretion is the Better Part of Valor")

Lo & Behold, the tranny issue bit them (their failure to setup a "protective umbrella" short/medium/long term R&D program, prevented a "rescue" solution), & we are where we are today..scrambling. TM is still "throwing money at the problem", hiring all sorts of top tier people. But, have they realized their mistakes & made adjustments to their Strategy? ("Risk Management", as per Bobby Baldwin the famous Vegas casino exeuctive & championship Poker player, business is afterall somewhat of a poker game)

"Increasingly, it's a race between Education [ R&D program, "Book Knowledge"/Academia & "Real World Knowledge"/Racing ] & Disaster"
-- H.G. Wells

TM may be "getting away with it" with their Drivetrain 1.5 "save", but can they continue along in poor "risk management" modus-operanda? No, it will eventually catch up with them. You can only "goto the well" so often, before Mr. Fate will intervene.

Maybe it's good that Martin is no longer there, he is free to use the lessons from TM ("Experience is a Great Teacher") to start his next venture. Hopefully, partner with this upcoming "Interdisciplinary Collaborative/Cooperative R&D Inst for Alternative Energy" to minimize risk for his new company.

Laurent

Judging from your posts, I wouldn't be surprised if Martin chose instead to get away from you as fast as possible, like 0 to 60 under 4 seconds.

chimpanzee

"Talk sense to a fool, & he calls you foolish"
-- Euripides

This is a familiar response when dealing with simpletons. I defer to Stephen Wolfram's remarks, when he left UIUC (triple appointment in Math, Physics, Computer Science):

"It was a mind numbing experience"
-- S. Wolfram, Re: undergrad students (as a whole, not everyone)

Another example. The recent CERN/LHC turn on, which has resulted in the usual attacks by ignoramuses/fools. MIT physicist Frank Wilczek/Nobel Laureate (who I know, & plan on working with in a HEP related project) was the target of death threats

Thanks for the feedback, I take it as a compliment.

Similarly, Martin's collision with xxx at TM is similar, he ran afoul of the same phenomena when trying to deal with idiots. Justine Musk said recently on her blog:

"It's one thing to be adored, but when you're reviled in equal measure...now that's a sign you've truly made it."
-- smashed car. sold book. met Coldplay, went to dinner with Coldplay upon Elon's request (after they visited TM LA store)


"If you're gonna go, GO BIG"
"Go Hard..or GO HOME"
-- offroad racing saying

"I always thought they went only half-way..NOT ALL THE WAY"
-- Dr. Ella Leppert (my HS history teacher)

I get the impression that there's been a lack of "following through" (as per the Eddie Rickenbacker quote "I shall give you a 6 word formula for Success: First, Think things through..then FOLLOW THROUGH")

TM was doing more "spending money" than "thinking through".

Judging from the lack of planning/forethought at TM (their management team), mainly not putting in place a short/medium/long term R&D program (Racing & Academia), most researchers (PhD level) would choose to stay away from the impending implosion at TM.

All they were (& still are) doing is:

- building up hype & getting VC funding

- "throwing money at the problem"
there is some innovation, however

Not impressed. But, I give them high marks for entrepeneurship, Vision, & "waking up the industry". The latter is probably their greatest contribution.

BTW, at the UIUC alumni awards honoring Martin, also was Dr. Alan Bovik (we got our PhDs at the same time '84, my PhD advisor was on his thesis committee):

Alumni award winners announced - ECE Illinois - U of I

His PhD advisor (David Munson) succeeded Ed Davidson (Martin's mentor @UIUC, mine also) as Dept Head EE Dept/Univ of Michigan. Alan used our labs (AARG) hi-speed Image Buffer (Air Force funded project), which was wire-wrapped by Martin while he was summer '81 intern (designed by R. Fletcher). I also designed & wire-wrapped an interface board for that image buffer.

"Go into it [ project ], with a GROUP OF PEOPLE"
-- Dr. XX, Caltech CS Dept

Bottomline:
There are a LOT of UIUC alumni, which could be useful weapons for Martin's future startup. Many of them are not only smart, but in powerful positions as well. (Director of Research & VP Corporate Technology @Intel, who was a summer '81 intern w/Martin). The R&D Inst could happen with a few emails & phone calls, via a "top down" approach.

"It's all about TRUST"
-- Mario Andretti

One lesson learned from TM, is that Martin was dealing with people he never worked with ("strangers"). The aforementioned UIUC alumni are less likely to screw you, there's a Law of Brotherhood going on.

"In a time of Need, YOU KNOW WHO YOUR REAL FRIENDS ARE"
"that's what friends are for"

My principal motivation is to help an old friend (Martin), I really had no interest in Alternative Energy or EV. Seriously. Funny thing happened, as I got more involved with a solution for Martin, I began to get INTO the whole Alternative Energy thing. I'm a fan now, & probably "jumping into the game" like Martin did.

TEG

chimpanzee:

Any idea why Martin never seems to respond to your posts?

With all the name dropping and idea proposing you have done, has he seen fit to contact you about them?

chimpanzee

I've been making my case know, about setting up a National Center for Energy Applications (to parallel the NCSA/National Ctr for Supercomputing Applications, that was founded by Dr. Larry Smarr/UIUC back in the 80's), as a virtual R&D Inst that is spread out "virtually" at leading Academic Institutions in USA.

It would help EV companies like TM, to lessen the burden of "Pushing the Technology" (which often "exceeds the limits", & creates engineering challenges & time-sensitive crises). It might have avoided last years crisis.

It would include:

1) Caltech
illustrious track record in Alternative Energy & Automotive. Dr. Paul Macready (Caltech aeronautics PhD) who founded Aerovironment, whose contract work for Hughes (partner with GM for EV1) was instrumental for EV1. This is where A. Cocconi & W. Rippel did their pioneering work, which led AC to found AC Propulsion. Which is where Martin was led to, in his search for an off-the-shelf EV sportscar. In the end, TM licensed ACP's PEM for the Roadster.

Produced the legendary Jim Hall, who invented "ground effects" for Auto Racing (Indycar & Formula 1). He is on the Advisory Board, for the Caltech Mech. Eng Dept.

2) UIUC
produced Martin Eberhard, co-founder of Tesla Motors. Another UIUC/Coordinated Science Laboratory/AARG alumni (same generation as Martin, early 80's) is Dr. Steve Cross, who is Vice-President of Georgia-Tech & President of GTRI/Georgia-Tech Research Inst, the latter which is involved with battery-technology research.

It also produced Dr. yyy (PhD '94, EE/Artificial Intelligence, the same field as Martin & me @UIUC/EE), who is now Vice-President & Director of Research of YYY (800 million dollar govt contractor in Virginia), whose company was involved with the LIVE Iridium vehicle-tracking for the DARPA Grand Challenge '05. I did a successful project with him/YYY in 2006

Martin's mentor Dr. Ed Davidson went on to Univ of Michigan/EE Dept as dept head. I last spoke with Ed in 2001, about my concept for an Interdiscipinary R&D Inst. Another UIUC EE prof (David Munson), also became UofM/EE Dept head (PhD advisor to A. Bovik/UT Austin, who received a UIUC alumni award a week ago on Sept 5, along with Martin). Think of the connections to Michigan based auto industry (GM, Ford, Chrysler, et al) that they have. Hint: "drive by wire" (computers in the control loop), an EE specialty.

3) Georgia-Tech & GTRI
see above. Leading engineering univ. At the time Martin & I were at UIUC, MIT was ranked #1, Stanford & UIUC were tied for 2nd.

S. Cross's ex-Gatech colleague is now President of Caltech. There is cross over with the above universities, so a Collaborative/Cooperative effort betweeen Caltech/Georgia-Tech/UIUC is even more probable.

4) UC San Diego/CALIT2
Dr. Larry Smarr (ex UIUC prof, founder of NCSA while at UIUC) moved on to lead CALIT2. The latter is leveraging Communications Technology to "help the emerging Economy of California". They have automotive related projects, so TM is a potential industrial partner. L. Smarr has experience going to Washington DC, pitching a proposal (with the RIGHT strategy), knowing Washington contacts, etc

Martin's co-summer intern '81 at Coordinated Science Lab/AARG was Andrew Chien (MIT PhD Computer Science) who became professor @UCSD. BTW, AC's dad was Martin's supervisor that summer. He recently moved on to Intel, as Director of Research & VP of Corporate Technology. His interest is Inference Computing (part of Ubiquitous Computing), which is related to my idea of using mobile-media-solutions for a Distributed Architecture for remote R&D infrastructure. More importantly, Intel could easily be an Industrial Partner for "drive by wire", e.g. microprocessors. There's a link to Caltech, since the co-founder of Intel is Gordon Moore (Caltech alumni), who makes philanthropic donations to Caltech.

5) Stanford
their DARPA Grand Challenge team (led by Dr. Sebastian Thrun, a CMU alumni) won in a Red Bull sponsored VW Touareg.

6) CMU
Dr. Steve Cross went thru CMU (Director of SEI/Software Engineering Inst), before he moved on to Georgia-Tech. CMU has a strong Artificial Intelligence/Vision/Robotics program (at the time Martin & I were at the "AI lab" at UIUC: MIT, Stanford, CMU were the "big 3"). They were the favorites in the DARPA Grand Challenge '05, & ended up winning the followup Urban Challenge (autonomous navigation vehicles in urban setting). I almost got hired after getting my PhD '84 here, & know Takeo Kanade. I just met him (the last time we met was at the '84 IJCPR/Int'l Joint Conference on Pattern Recognition in Montreal, where I gave a paper) at the recent SIGGRAPH 2008 conference.

7) Univ of Michigan
Martin's mentor Dr. Ed Davidson ended up Dept Head at EE dept. David Munson (UIUC EE prof) later became dept head as well. Think of the connections with Michigan based automotive firms like GM, Ford, Chrysler, et al.

8) MIT
name speaks for itself. A leading researcher (Chemistry dept) for future battery technology is there.

The above is a sample "dream team" of powerhouse Academic Partners.

Industrial Partners candidates include

1) TM

2) Fraunhofer Inst
they are designed to help German Industry like Daimler Benz, Volkswagen, BMW, by being pro-active in search/solution of engineering problems..BEFORE they arise in manufacturing). I've been in touch with these people since 2001 (when I began to formulate my concept for an Interdisciplinary R&D Inst), & just renewed some contacts at the recent SIGGRAPH 2008 conference. I met a German CS prof (w/Fraunhofer Inst), who was excited about my idea involving TM.

3) Northrop-Grumman
1 of the Caltech Mech Eng profs is on sabbatical to NG, I believe to explore the Alternative Energy option. There is an Aerospace + Alternative Energy paradigm, i.e. the Technology for the former can be translated/transferred to the latter. Aerovironment (Aeronautics + Environment) founded by Dr. Paul Macready (Caltech alumni, aeronautics PhD) was probably the 1st to demonstrate this concept.

one of my Dad's PhD students is high up @NG (Houston), & I've recently contacted him. This hi-level contact (& others above) are key to a "top-down" approach to getting some Infrastructure created for Alternative Energy.

4) Boeing
1 of my Dad's (who was Dept Head Aeronautical/Astronautical Eng @UIUC) PhD students ended up Program Mgr for the Space Shuttle Division. My dad has extensive contacts with Boeing, his consulting work with them dates back to the 50's. Again, the Aerospace + Alternative Energy paradigm is relevant. With the political hype for Alternative Energy in full swing (subsidies, loans, etc), Aerospace companies will be eager to "jump in the game"

=========

The appropriate question is

"What would happen if the powers-to-be in Washington got their sh*t together ("reinvented themselves") & designed a Collaborative/Cooperative Infrastructure (like Japan does for Govt & Industry) to ACCELERATE the development of Alternative Energy in this country?"

The above would include this virtual R&D Inst (located at powerhouse American universities, with Industrial Partners like TM), as an "R&D engine" for Alternative Energy companies. It would also include a comprehensive program to subsidize Entrepeneurial activity in Alternative Energy. Say, Martin's next entrepeneurial venture.

People like L. Smarr (who has gone to Washington, pitched a proposal, & funded the founding of NCSA), M. Eberhard (who has testified on Congressional panels), Dr. Steve Cross (VP of Georgia-Tech & President of GTRI, who has testified about Internet Security at Congressional Panel), & others (like Bob Lutz/GM, who is friendly w/Martin) need to be recruited to do the above. All 3 are UIUC alumni, have brand-name-recognition & are in a position of power.

[ CONTINUED ]

chimpanzee

I need more feedback from the "smarter than the average bear" members on this forum, to fine-tune the above. Then, a proposal can be written.

"Talk the talk, walk the walk"

My verbal hyperactivity of recent, is towards the latter: getting sh*t done, making things happen. I view it as a continuation of what Martin has started (with his co-founding of Tesla Motors)

"Life is 20% what happens to you, 80% HOW YOU RESPOND TO IT"
-- a wise man once said

The events of last year at TM, are suggesting a future response. Hopefully, it can be conducive towards an _accelerated_ movement by US Govt & Industry/Academia towards a cool Needs/Solution package for Alternative Energy. There's a saying in Business "Timing is Everything". The outrageous gas prices & downturn in Economy, might be the perfect stimulus to get the Washington characters motivated to design something to boost the American economy.