What was going on at Tesla to bring the Model 3 to fruition and at GM, the Chevy Bolt? Who really has the upper hand in Electric Car Production?

What Can Tesla Learn From Chevy Bolt Production Ramp?

There has been a lot of talk about what the fate of Tesla will be when the big legacy automakers start producing EVs in earnest. With their century of experience and established production lines, they will roll over Tesla. They will show how real carmakers take a new model through production.

From article, (It took GM nine months to deliver the first batch of Bolts to customers and GM was praised for delivering a great car.

It took Tesla about six months to deliver the first batch to customers, and the critics had a field day. The talks of failure and broken promises filled the airwaves.

Putting the path to production side by side should make comparison easy.

	GM		Tesla
late 2015 / early 2016	Physically preparing assembly line for Bolt production.	April–June 2017	Tesla receives 467 Kuka robots for the Model 3 assembly line. Physically building the assembly line, placing the robots in place. Start hiring new workers for the Model 3 production line.
March 2016	Start of pre-production on existing assembly line with experienced labor.	July 2017	Tesla “Start of production of Model 3” and delivery of first 30 models. This is more like GM pre-production or even an earlier phase. In reality this is the start of configuration and validation of the production line and the received parts. New labor is being hired and trained. As a by-product of this process some cars are assembled.
		August 2017	The dreaded “One supplier dropped the ball” problem becomes reality. In the battery assembly in Reno at the Gigafactory, two of the four assembly modules are not working as expected. They have to be replaced by newly designed equipment. This will take 6-9 months.
June 2016	First pre-production Bolts sighted driving around.	Sep–Nov 2017	Tesla keeps configuring the car assembly line. The failing battery assembly modules in Reno are augmented by manual labor to get enough battery packs to keep the workforce in Fremont busy with the assembly line. Deliveries to employees slowly increase.
Sep 2016	GM has ample Bolt models for test drives by journalists.	December 2017	First reviews from bloggers and journalists.
October 2016	Start of production of the Chevy Bolt at the Sirius plant. Targeted yearly rate of 25,000 vehicles which should be enough for domestic and foreign demand. Even export to China is possible.	December 2017	Most of the assembly line works as designed. Start of low-volume production for customers. Last seven days average production over 100 cars per day, which would mean 36,500 cars per year if extrapolated that long.
December 2016	The first 579 Bolts are delivered. Production reaches 100 per day. Nationwide availability in mid-2017.	December 2017	First deliveries to non-employees.
April 2017	After 7 months of production + 6 months of pre-production, GM Bolt is officially available nationwide, although some dealers lack inventory. Sales over 1,000 per month	Jan 2018	After 7 months of (pre)production, deliveries nationwide. Tesla Model 3 outsells the Chevy Bolt.
		Feb 2018	Model 3 production steady over 1,000 per week and higher than the Chevy Bolt production. But Tesla is still in building assembly line phase due to the battery assembly problems.
		March 2018	If worst problems in the battery assembly are solved by new assembly lines built by Tesla Grohmann Advanced Automation, planned ramp of assembly line can be resumed. Half a year delay because of Tesla’s lack of QA on a supplier on the battery assembly.
May–Dec 2017	Sales keep climbing in the USA. But GM not able to meet demand abroad. MY 2018 changes are very small.	April–Oct 2018	Sales keep climbing in the USA. But not able to meet demand abroad. Start production AWD and SR models.

Tesla clearly does not have a production scaling problem. It accomplished in six months what GM did in nine months. The PR debacle was purely badly managed expectations and a communications problem.

Musk took a big risk by calling the start of Model 3 assembly line configuration start of Model 3 production.

In the future, Tesla should only create the hype about their products, but stay mute on the timelines.)

For More Info

The New Weapon of the Seas, the UUVs, (Undersea Drones).

Naval Warfare Will Change Forever If Submarines Turn into Underwater Aircraft Carriers

Imagine a future in which nuclear attack submarines (SSNs) can deploy undersea drones (UUVs) to hunt, and possibly kill, enemy subs. The U.S. Navy, at least, is taking steps to make this a reality. What impact could this have? On the one hand, UUVs could shake modern antisubmarine warfare (ASW) to its core, making existing platforms vulnerable or obsolete.

From article, (Imagine a future in which nuclear attack submarines (SSNs) can deploy undersea drones (UUVs) to hunt, and possibly kill, enemy subs. The U.S. Navy, at least, is taking steps to make this a reality. What impact could this have? On the one hand, UUVs could shake modern antisubmarine warfare (ASW) to its core, making existing platforms vulnerable or obsolete.

Both the United States and competitor nations have eagerly pursued the potential of UUVs. UUVs can contribute to both the hunting and the killing parts of ASW, although as of yet the only firm plans involve using them in the former. Such drones offer better opportunities to track and destroy diesel-electric subs, even those which use Air-independent propulsion (AIP) technology. These vessels can operate more quietly than manned subs, and remain submerged for a greater length of time. Instead of hunting enemy submarines, they can simply lay in wait until the prey comes to them.

China has reportedly experimented with “glider” drones, capable of remaining at specific depths without the need for propulsion. The United States has used such drones for years, and although at this time they lack much practical applicability under wartime conditions, they do offer a way of monitoring and evaluating the undersea environment. China is also working on integrating UUVs into its network of undersea sensors, creating an “Underwater Great Wall” capable of detecting and deterring U.S. subs. The United States has also done work on surface autonomous vessels that could perform the hunting, and potentially the killing, of enemy submarines. A prototype vessel joined the U.S. Navy in January.

The newest thinking combines drones with torpedoes. The U.S. Navy hopes to use small UUVs, capable of being launched from a torpedo tube, to create the same kind of picture of the undersea space that satellites, radars and UAVs can create of airspace. Using both passive and active sonars, UUVs could deploy from an SSN and explore the area, attempting to detect any threats to their mothership. 

Having ascertained the existence of threats, the UUVs could either light the target up with active sonar (allowing the SSN to target and destroy it with torpedoes), passively communicate data to the mothership, or potentially carry out a “suicide” attack against the target themselves. In effect UUVs have the potential to expand the lethal reach of an attack boat, as well as take care of threats in its own area.)

For More Info

Why is Asteroid Mining seen as a popular idea? And, how can The Falcon Heavy Rocket Help in this Endeavor?

Asteroid mining: What is it? SpaceX Falcon Heavy could make it a reality

GETTY Mining for space rocks has long been a feature of science fiction, but it could in fact become reality in the future. At the Seattle World's Fair in 1962, US Vice President Lyndon Johnson reportedly said: "Someday we will be able to bring an asteroid containing billions of dollars worth of critically needed materials close to Earth to provide a vast source of mineral wealth to our factories."

From article, (At the Seattle World’s Fair in 1962, US Vice President Lyndon Johnson reportedly said: “Someday we will be able to bring an asteroid containing billions of dollars worth of critically needed materials close to Earth to provide a vast source of mineral wealth to our factories.”

Some 13,000 asteroid pass close by to Earth yearly – known as Near-Earth Objects (NEOs).

What is asteroid mining?

According to Futurism.com, asteroid mining is the “exploitation and extraction of raw materials from asteroids and other minor planets, including near-Earth objects”.

Materials can be mined form these objects and used for space construction or taken back to earth.

These materials have a staggering value, and “could help with humanity’s colonisation efforts”.

For example, the iron found in the asteroid 16 Psyche is worth an estimated $10 quintillion (£7.1 quintillion), according to NASA.

If it was possible to mine all the minerals found in the astroids between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter the total value would be enough to give every human being on Earth about $100 billion (£142 billion).

How could the Falcon Heavy make it a reality?

One astronomer, Martin Elvis, believes the SpaceX Falcon Heavy, the world’s most powerful rocket, could make this a reality.

Earlier this month, Elon Musk’s space company SpaceX successfully launched its Falcon Heavy rocket into space.

Elvis, an astronomer from the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics thinks that the massive rocket could be the spacecraft needed to land on an asteroid.

Getting to the asteroid in the first place is one of the main challenges of asteroid mining.

In order to do this mining equipment would need to break free from Earth’s orbit.

The thrust required to make this shift, known as delta-v, is so massive it is thought to be unprofitable.

The spacecraft would need to be powerful enough to switch between low-Earth orbit and orbit around the asteroid.

However, the Falcon Heavy is currently capable of greater thrust than any other active rocket on Earth.

Elvis told an audience at the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Austin Texas that the Falcon Heavy could increase the number of asteroids we could potentially land on by a factor of 15.)

For More Info

Scientist Excited by New Material to Create Solar Cells

Solar power: the next generation

Why Scientists are excited by 'next-generation' solar cells and what they could mean for the future of energy. Scientists are working on an exciting new material called perovskite - a light sensitive crystal which could revolutionise solar power.

 From article, (Why Scientists are excited by 'next-generation' solar cells and what they could mean for the future of energy.

Scientists are working on an exciting new material called perovskite – a light sensitive crystal which could revolutionise solar power.

In just a few years its power conversion efficiency figure is nearly on a par with traditional silicon at around 22 per cent, and it’s some 1,000 times thinner.

All this could mean the price we pay for solar power in the future could fall considerably.

These third generation solar cells are built-up layer by layer, like a sandwich, with perovskite as the light-harvesting active layer.

It is semi-transparent, meaning a building’s windows could one day be replaced by coloured plates of perovskite, that would also generate electricity.

Experiments on the solar cells are taking place in the Ecole Polytechnique Federale Lausanne as part of the EU’s GOTSolar research project. Directing research there is Professor Michael Grätzel.

He says: “What is surprising about perovskites is that they’re made from a solution with simple procedures and from materials which are readily available and we’re seeing performance results which today are already ahead of silicon polycrystals.

“The caveat is the lead, of course, we must be careful we manage this weakness properly. But otherwise, it really is an extraordinary material, which will forge its own path.”

To get around the lead, scientists coat the solar cells in protective glass. This also solves one of the other problems – perovskites are very sensitive to humidity, and the glass protects them from moisture.

The final layer of the solar cell is gold, which acts as an electrode.)

For More Info

A (Supercapacitor) Breakthrough that Charges your Electric Car in Minutes.

Energy storage leap could slash electric car charging times

Researchers have claimed a breakthrough in energy storage technology that could enable electric cars to be driven as far as petrol and diesel vehicles, and recharge in minutes rather than hours. Teams from Bristol University and Surrey University developed a next-generation material for supercapacitors, which store electric charge and can be replenished faster than normal batteries.

 From article, (Researchers have claimed a breakthrough in energy storage technology that could enable electric cars to be driven as far as petrol and diesel vehicles, and recharge in minutes rather than hours.

Teams from Bristol University and Surrey University developed a next-generation material for supercapacitors, which store electric charge and can be replenished faster than normal batteries.

This could allow cars to recharge in 10 minutes, rather than the eight hours it can take to replenish the lithium-ion batteries in current electric vehicles.

The technology has sufficient energy density to comfortably surpass the 200 to 350-mile ranges of leading battery-powered cars such as Teslas, according to its backers.

Dr Donald Highgate, the director of research at Superdielectrics – a company that worked with the universities on the research, said: “It could have a seismic effect on energy, but it’s not a done deal.”

Supercapacitors have existed for decades and can store and release power rapidly. Tesla’s Elon Musk has said a breakthrough in transportation is more likely to come from supercaps than batteries.

There are drawbacks to the technology, however. If you left a supercap car for a month at an airport car park, it would have lost much of its charge by the time you returned, the researchers admitted. For this reason, they expect the first such cars to also have a small conventional battery.

The Bristol-Surrey teams believe the polymer they are using could be more energy-dense than lithium ion, holding 180 watt-hours per kilogram compared with 100W⋅h/kg-120W⋅h/kg for commercial lithium ion.

Dr Thomas Miller, an expert on supercapacitors at University College London, who was not involved in the work, said the technology would have to scale up to compete. “If a significant leap has been made in energy density, it would be an important achievement,” he said.

“One major consideration that is yet to be proven is the scalability, cost and sustainability of the new technology.”)

For More Info