Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government Security Transportation United States Technology

What If the Next Presidential Limo Was a Tesla? 330

Posted by timothy
from the anything-that'll-turn-into-a-pumpkin-please dept.
cartechboy writes "The presidential limo is known as "The Beast," and it's getting to be about that time where it's replaced. Currently The Beast is a General Motors creation with a Cadillac badge, but what if the next presidential limo was a Tesla? Stick with me here. The Beast is a massive vehicle, which means there would be plenty of room in the structure to have a long battery pack a la Model S. Plus, it could use the upcoming Model X's all-wheel-drive system. Tesla's air suspension would keep it from encountering high-centering issues. There could even be a charging port on both the front and back so a battery truck could hook up while driving, like in-flight refueling. Obviously the battery pack would need to have extra protection so it wouldn't have any issues with road debris, but that's a minor issue. Tesla is an American company, and that's a requirement for The Beast. So is it that far fetched to think the next presidential limo could be a Tesla?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

What If the Next Presidential Limo Was a Tesla?

Comments Filter:
  • by Kevin Fishburne (1296859) <kevinfishburne@e ... Eom minus caffei> on Thursday March 13, 2014 @04:53PM (#46477767) Homepage
    How small can they make nuclear reactors these days? Tesla could make the President's new "Beast" something like the Tumbler from the new Batman movies, with an extra 1000 HP thrown in for good measure.
  • American made? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by PPH (736903) on Thursday March 13, 2014 @05:15PM (#46478021)

    Buy a Mercedes off the Alabama production line.

    Oh, you meant corporate citizenship? F*ck the workers. Buy a GM from a Mexican line.

  • by kenh (9056) on Thursday March 13, 2014 @06:02PM (#46478397) Homepage Journal

    There's a number of reasons why we don't have electric tanks, and those are the reasons the next 'Beast' will not be electric:

    Weight
    Time to recharge
    Life of charge
    Massive engine needed to move armored vehicle
    Massive batteries needed to power the massive engine

  • Emergency Scenario (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Ukab the Great (87152) on Thursday March 13, 2014 @06:45PM (#46478705)

    To back up the parent post, let's say in a single day a sudden coup brings down the government of a development country the president is currently visiting. In i's place is an extremist government that's extremely hostile to the US made up of a lot of recently former terrorists who would love nothing more than hold the US president hostage (or worse). The president is nowhere near Air Force One, and The Beast has to drive 800 miles across hostile territory to reach a SEAL extraction team in a friendly country. The route has to go through very rural areas where Secret Service agents have to do things like hold up gas stations, spending only five minutes pumping before moving on. And where gas stations are sparse, forget even about electric fast-charging stations, the agents have to sneak up to parked cars and steal gas quickly with specialized pump-driven siphons, relying on the fact that gasoline can easily transferred from one car to another quickly. Far faster than any kind of scheme with jumper cables. In this nightmare scenario, you want something ridiculously ubiquitous and instantly replenishable.

    An electric Beast would be an absolutely terrible idea. Stateside an electric Beast would actually be a neat PR bit to show the Oval Office cares about green technology. But the fact that electric car advocate geeks will take issue with the above scenario and will make endless excuses for their technology and will dismiss very legitimate practical concerns with electric says a lot about how detached from reality the electric car movement really is right now. Screaming "FUD" really doesn't make anything better.

  • by guruevi (827432) <eviNO@SPAMsmokingcube.be> on Thursday March 13, 2014 @06:58PM (#46478801) Homepage

    You got bigger problems then. Even actual tanks are disabled/destroyed by those. Heck, an armor penetrating bullet or bullets will do.

  • by TheGavster (774657) on Thursday March 13, 2014 @07:38PM (#46479055) Homepage

    As Truman famously said, The Buck Stops Here. The president is the head of the executive branch and the commander in chief of the armed forces. He absolutely has authority over his personal security. My opinion? Take a queue from the Queen and take public transit [upi.com]. Or from the Pope and walk [catholic.org]. Even heads of states who have boots on the ground in Afghanistan fly commercial [cnn.com]. Nothing supports a culture of fear more than a leader who doesn't have enough faith in his people to travel among them.

  • by bill_mcgonigle (4333) * on Friday March 14, 2014 @12:54AM (#46480239) Homepage Journal

    I suppose a would-be assassin would take a random pot shot at the guy, but that speaks more to how that motorcade shouldn't be so obvious when it is passing through either.

    Perhaps it speaks more to being the head of an organization that is so reviled. Jefferson made note of the huge lines of people who would come to his office to complain about this or that. He only detested the ones who came seeking political appointments. I never read about anybody taking so much as a swing at him in his office.

Our business is run on trust. We trust you will pay in advance.

Working...