-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
-
Tesla's Supercharger Team was recently laid off. We discuss what this means for the company on today's TMC Podcast streaming live at 1PM PDT. You can watch on X or on YouTube where you can participate in the live chat.
Tesla Supercharger network
- Thread starter dsm363
- Start date
Some interesting Supercharger details on a UK site planning application, including a spec-sheet for the supercharger cabinets.
I don't think the planning site permits direct linking, but if you go to:
http://pa.midkent.gov.uk/online-applications/
and search for "charging", it comes up as the top result (it's application no. 14/502735).
The spec sheet confirms that the supercharger power limits are based on 192A per phase input power - giving DC output of 143kW if the input is 480V, but only 115kW if the input is 380V. This sounds very much like 12 of the chargers as used in EU-spec cars (which are 3-phase input at 16A per phase). Efficiency comes out at a shade over 90%, near enough constant across the different voltages given the rounding of these numbers.
Other interesting stuff in the application: projected usage (200-300 charges/month initially and rising to max of 1,100 charges/month for this 6-stall site), the application includes the solar canopy (though no sign of it being built yet), they note that they wouldn't normally need to apply for planning permission as adding charging to existing parking spaces is "Permitted Development" (interesting that the same search brings up a load of other applications, including Ecotricity's CCS/CHAdeMO installation nearby - why aren't they claiming Permitted Development?). Even the comments to the public consultation from a neighbour who considers himself a "car enthusiast" are amusing to read.
I don't think the planning site permits direct linking, but if you go to:
http://pa.midkent.gov.uk/online-applications/
and search for "charging", it comes up as the top result (it's application no. 14/502735).
The spec sheet confirms that the supercharger power limits are based on 192A per phase input power - giving DC output of 143kW if the input is 480V, but only 115kW if the input is 380V. This sounds very much like 12 of the chargers as used in EU-spec cars (which are 3-phase input at 16A per phase). Efficiency comes out at a shade over 90%, near enough constant across the different voltages given the rounding of these numbers.
Other interesting stuff in the application: projected usage (200-300 charges/month initially and rising to max of 1,100 charges/month for this 6-stall site), the application includes the solar canopy (though no sign of it being built yet), they note that they wouldn't normally need to apply for planning permission as adding charging to existing parking spaces is "Permitted Development" (interesting that the same search brings up a load of other applications, including Ecotricity's CCS/CHAdeMO installation nearby - why aren't they claiming Permitted Development?). Even the comments to the public consultation from a neighbour who considers himself a "car enthusiast" are amusing to read.
Benz
Active Member
Has anybody noticed that the list right under the maps have been removed. They have replaced it by a link to the "Find US" page.
Yes, unfortunately.
"Find US" is fine for desktop, but works poorly on my Android phone and doesn't work at all on the car's browser.
purplewalt
Active Member
But if you are in your car, you can look at Superchargers on your Nav screen: they are listed by proximity/distance from where you currently are.
Sorry for not being clear. I can find Superchargers fine, but I don't always know what services are available nearby. Can the Nav screen provide this? On the old list, clicking on entry would provide this information and more.
The County Commissioners have only recently approved this installation. It's unlikely that Tesla and it's contractor has had time to prepare and file for building permits.
Larry
Tesla hasn't been listing amenities with newer sites and has apparently removed information from older sites. The North American Tesla Superchargers wiki lists amenities for many (but not all) sites if you click on a pin on the map.
Yes and there aren't good links for each Supercharger anymore to share that information easily.
HillCountryFun
Member
This is a good point, one of the areas where the Tesla Infotainment system is lacking is illustrating Points Of Interest (POIs) on the big screen. This should be an option any time, not just when you're visiting a SuperCharger. Tesla, this would be a VERY nice enhancement...please! :smile:
thelastdeadmouse
Member
We're in need of a new batch of "Coming Soon" dots on the supercharger map, but here is an update on the status of the remaining coming soon locations (italicized) and other upcoming superchargers we know of:
Waiting for transformer / power on:
West Hartford, CT
Auburn, MA
Hope, BC
Kamloops, BC
Under construction:
Cabazon, CA
Culver City, CA
El Centro, CA
Petaluma, CA
Atlanta, GA
Lake Charles, LA
Butte, MT
Superior, MT
Canmore, AB
Drummondville, QC
Montreal, QC
Location known, may be under construction:
Brattleboro, VT
San Diego, CA
In permitting, location known:
Lone Pine, CA
Defuniak Springs, FL
Plantation, FL
Baton Rouge, LA
West Springfield, MA
Hooksett, NH
Charlotte, NC
Clarence, NY
Grove City, OH
Allentown (Whitehall), PA
Denton, TX
Red Deer, AB
Golden, BC
Revelstoke, BC
Barrie, ON
In site selection / permitting / under construction with site not known:
unknown site #1, AR- contractor reported two Arkansas sites had gone out to bid
unknown site #2, AR- contractor reported two Arkansas sites had gone out to bid
Calabasas, CA - contractor reported this site had gone out to bid
Manteca, CA
Needles, CA
Thousand Oaks, CA - contractor reported this site had gone out to bid
Manteca, CA
Jacksonville, FL
Coeur d'Alene, ID
Effingham, IL
Portland, ME
Columbia, MO
Independence, MO
St. Charles, MO
Elko, NV- contractor reported site went out to bid
unknown site, NV - contractor reported site went out to bid
Portsmouth, NH
Utica, NY
Syracuse, NY
Greenville, SC
Tooele or Wendover, UT - Tooele county official reported that a supercharger was coming
Gillette, WY
Sheridan, WY
Comber, ON
Woodstock, ON
Location not known:
Downtown Los Angeles, CA
Baltimore-Washington corridor, MD
Las Vegas #2, NV
Waiting for transformer / power on:
West Hartford, CT
Auburn, MA
Hope, BC
Kamloops, BC
Under construction:
Cabazon, CA
Culver City, CA
El Centro, CA
Petaluma, CA
Atlanta, GA
Lake Charles, LA
Butte, MT
Superior, MT
Canmore, AB
Drummondville, QC
Montreal, QC
Location known, may be under construction:
Brattleboro, VT
San Diego, CA
In permitting, location known:
Lone Pine, CA
Defuniak Springs, FL
Plantation, FL
Baton Rouge, LA
West Springfield, MA
Hooksett, NH
Charlotte, NC
Clarence, NY
Grove City, OH
Allentown (Whitehall), PA
Denton, TX
Red Deer, AB
Golden, BC
Revelstoke, BC
Barrie, ON
In site selection / permitting / under construction with site not known:
unknown site #1, AR- contractor reported two Arkansas sites had gone out to bid
unknown site #2, AR- contractor reported two Arkansas sites had gone out to bid
Calabasas, CA - contractor reported this site had gone out to bid
Manteca, CA
Needles, CA
Thousand Oaks, CA - contractor reported this site had gone out to bid
Manteca, CA
Jacksonville, FL
Coeur d'Alene, ID
Effingham, IL
Portland, ME
Columbia, MO
Independence, MO
St. Charles, MO
Elko, NV- contractor reported site went out to bid
unknown site, NV - contractor reported site went out to bid
Portsmouth, NH
Utica, NY
Syracuse, NY
Greenville, SC
Tooele or Wendover, UT - Tooele county official reported that a supercharger was coming
Gillette, WY
Sheridan, WY
Comber, ON
Woodstock, ON
Location not known:
Downtown Los Angeles, CA
Baltimore-Washington corridor, MD
Las Vegas #2, NV
Last edited:
purplewalt
Active Member
Imagine the possibilities if we could enter a few overlay urls.. Just like on Google Earth? We could have all kinds of Points Of Interest, facts, speedtraps etc...
Last edited:
gg_got_a_tesla
Model S: VIN 65513, Model 3: VIN 1913
I'm not going to get any love for this, especially from Tesla owners in CA, but it bothers me the emphasis Tesla is placing on supercharging CA at the expense of the rest of the country. CA already has an extremely large number of superchargers while parts of the U.S. have none. For example, good luck traveling anywhere in ID, NE, ND, most of NV, OK, AR, etc. There is currently no supercharger route between Gallup, NM and TX, or Topeka, KS to Indianapolis, IN. This list is not iall inclusive, but just examples.
I realize CA has a larger proportion of cars than other states, but I submit that Tesla will not significantly increase sales in other states until such time as they "wire" up the other states with superchargers. Even if people don't do long trips across state lines on a regular basis, they want to know they have the ability to do so, especially when spending as much money on a car as a Tesla costs. I have discussions with people all the time about this, and their primary objection to the Tesla is that they are confined to a limited region with the car. Most people are not willing to spend hours upon hours at an RV park to charge. I did it several times and its not much fun.
I submit that Tesla should use its equipment, crews, etc. to install superchargers along the entire U.S., and then they can proceed with filling in the "gaps" in CA. I truly believe this is the way to get the car to be more than an oddity in states across the U.S. As the saying goes, "build it and they will come". Build superchargers in every state of the U.S. and Teslas will be purchased in every state, not predominately some states.
No, I do not live in any of the states or regions mentioned in this post above. As a Tesla fan and a stockholder, I wish to see the appeal of the car and the company spread to as many people and places as possible.
I realize CA has a larger proportion of cars than other states, but I submit that Tesla will not significantly increase sales in other states until such time as they "wire" up the other states with superchargers. Even if people don't do long trips across state lines on a regular basis, they want to know they have the ability to do so, especially when spending as much money on a car as a Tesla costs. I have discussions with people all the time about this, and their primary objection to the Tesla is that they are confined to a limited region with the car. Most people are not willing to spend hours upon hours at an RV park to charge. I did it several times and its not much fun.
I submit that Tesla should use its equipment, crews, etc. to install superchargers along the entire U.S., and then they can proceed with filling in the "gaps" in CA. I truly believe this is the way to get the car to be more than an oddity in states across the U.S. As the saying goes, "build it and they will come". Build superchargers in every state of the U.S. and Teslas will be purchased in every state, not predominately some states.
No, I do not live in any of the states or regions mentioned in this post above. As a Tesla fan and a stockholder, I wish to see the appeal of the car and the company spread to as many people and places as possible.
I have at least one person waiting for an SC to open near Oklahoma City before they order--and of course, I'm waiting too as it would make trips so much easier. However, I also realize there's a fine line that Tesla has to tread between alienating their existing customers and creating new ones. I'd like to see a 1 to 1 to 1 to 1 situation. One in California, one on on the East Coast, and one in the barren areas and one in Canada.
Also the way they've been building it is linear, so if they have a hold up with one location on a route, they don't build the next one. For example, if Denton takes a year to get the permit approved, nothing closer to Oklahoma city will be built--even though a number of people could use it without Denton being completed. That slows up the rollout.
If it were me, I'd say, "Okay, we need these ten SCs to connect X to Y. Let's start them at the same time". So maybe #3 and #7 would get finished first. That would accomplish three things:
1) It would show progress--I think it's the lack of progress that causes the most complaints.
2) It would cause the folks in the other places along the route to put pressure on the towns involved to approve the sites more quickly.
3) It would benefit at least some people.
Similar threads
- Poll
