I humbly submit the following comments. I tried to read all the replies in this thread, and apologize if I missed, misread or misinterpreted anything.
I recently purchased a used 2007 19 foot Safari SE. I DO like it and will probably keep it.
I think that the Airstream is an icon because during development in the earlier half of last century, the builder had a vision and a mission to create a travel trailer that incorporated the most modern materials, best engineering, and latest technology in a functional trailer that could be towed by the family car.
I believe what the OP is trying to say is "why don't we take the original AS mission, above, and apply it to modern times?" In fact, when I was shopping for a travel trailer, that is exactly what my expectations were... like the OP, there just isn't any product out there that lived up to those expectations.
The family car is no longer as big as a bus and doesn't have 8 cylinders. Why can't we build a functional trailer that can be towed by one of today's family cars? I agree that to do so we would need to probably have an aluminum alloy frame, carbon fiber shell, improved insulation, etc. The shape could be re-engineered to balance our modern understanding of aerodynamics with functionality. For example, EVERYONE has an AC unit these days, but trailers are still built in such a way that the unit is always stuck on top, rather than built in. Likewise for other roof fittings, vents, etc. Decor is secondary, outfit the interior as you want.
Hi Quentin; I have checked out above site, and while the cars are are making my mouth water, the trailer is a different story. In our life we all have developed different likes and dislikes. The shown trailer is down right fugly to me. It would be plain and ugly in any color and much to futuristic for my taste.
There is no warmth to the interior to feel like home. Perhaps it may be great for work station in space but not the camper. I bet if a survey was taken you would not find many buyers. Thanks, "Boatdoc"
"Mehrzeller will most likely move forward, and not remain just a crazy one-off prototype, because it has the backing of such heavyweights as BMW, 3M and many others."
. . . this will remain a one off because it violates a very important design rule.
There is no discernable purpose behind the oddly shaped trapzoidal cells other than to make the outside a distraction and the inside uncomfortable.
It's looks like a freight container that was rolled down a hill by a bunch of crazy pelicans.
Architectonically it's interesting, in a Buckminster Fuller sort of way. As a practical RV, it's sh*t. Sorry, but I can't see it being practical for towing nor for me and my two young Labradors to live comfortably in. For something as pragmatic as an RV, the design solution must reflect this. Design for designs sake alone most often flops. This trailer would flop. If you want to start from scratch, understand your target audience and programme accordingly. Upgrade materials and finishes. Explore aerodynamics and weights. But never forget what the object is being used for and the rigors imposed upon it from that use.
__________________
Cameron & the Labradors
Kai & Samm
North Vancouver, BC
Canada
I think it's interesting to look at. Modular design in itself can be a great idea for both variability of functionality, and ease of production.
But like markdoane pointed out, there is no functional purpose for the shape of these modules, and the shape itself is what makes the modules both less functional, and more difficult to build. Those are two very, very bad things with respect to mass production.
I won't argue aesthetics because that's very subjective, and there are probably some people who would purchase this based on aesthetics alone. But I have a feeling that after living in it for a short time, they would regret that emotionally driven purchase.
Anyway, if it DOES catch on, more power to 'em. I'll stick with my "retro-cool" aluminum beauty and remodel the interior to suit my needs. And no matter how much I spend, I guarantee it's substantially less than what one of these Mehrzeller units would cost me...
Hi, the cars in this article are very sleek and aerodynamic looking so I would expect something similar with the trailer. The trailer, to me, looks like an aerodynamic disaster. Hard to describe; Ice sculpture or lead crystal vase on it's side? No Sale!
Upon checking the Mehrzeller site in German, it turns out to be a Senior/Master's ("Diplom" degree) thesis of a university student. As such, the cooperation partners are not necessarily commercial partners. They surely are interested in the ideas, but that does not mean they are interested in commercial production of the concept.
I read your post with great interest. I must say that the first thought that came into my head was the dichotomy of "radical" and "conservative. It is often the case that a quantum leap in new ideas is lead by the determination of an individual(eg. Wally Byam) and the idea succeeds through it's popularity with the rest of us.
When an idea becomes mainstream you then face the problem that followers join in. The problem with these "followers" is that they practice pragmatism or even expediency and the richness and purity of the idea becomes corrupted - what was radical becomes neo-conservative!
The idea, however diluted, will succeed in the absence of a new order.
...enough philosophy
I feel that the Airstream is still radical. When I read the first posts of new forum members they often talk of their "conversion" to the Airstream. An Airstream is a good idea in the same way as having four wheels on your wagon is a good idea. Seldom does beauty and utility go hand in hand so well. However, the Airstream is an individual choice. As such, it becomes a hostage trying to be all things to all people. I believe it will endure. Demand for improvements and adaptations will find their time without a "radical" change!
I agree, longdog and Moonstruck, that the execution of the Mehrzeller design is- well- primitive. Understand Student Mehrzeller. Has a project, and flat foamboard, probably. So he takes the F117 approach. Not a fan of radical facet geometries myself, I love the conceptual value nevertheless. Using lighter materials, differently. Exactly my point.
The counter-arguments about 'leaving good enough alone" just don't fly, longdog is right. Wally CONSTANTLY innovated.
A honeycomb composite structural floor, slide-out composite (translucent, perhaps?) shells, an operable roof terrace with int. ladder stairs, and a tent structure to cover the upper level, these are concepts that could derive great innovative effectiveness. This is what I mean about design-driven vernacular.
Chris Deam did a great leap in simplifying interiors. Some like the granny-look cabs, he didn't. I'm simply stating that with some innovative use of new materials increased floor area, lighter tow weight and greater structural rigidity are possible, AT a lower cost. As Moonstruck mentions with pragmatism and expediency, this IS beauty and utility.
The "don't mess with tradition-leave it alone" concept is corrupt because change is constant, even in business. Thor and Airstream think conservatively because their Classic training and box-like thinking are habitually enforcing. No need to change until radical new designs FORCE them to react. This problewm is that then the Nø 1 is reacting to market. As Ries and Trout state in 22 Laws of Marketing, the leader has to constantly innovate to keep the other competitors to reacting in therir design layouts. On the defensive they can never increase marketshare.
Moonstruck, AS is no longer radical, in fact I never think they were. Perception varies, and the public is mutable.
I just want them to make a model like the late 50's again. Make it the same way but upgrade the appliances and utilities. Of course it would be cool if they polished it....
__________________ Let those who can play, let those who cann't rule.
I agree, longdog and Moonstruck, that the execution of the Mehrzeller design is- well- primitive. Understand Student Mehrzeller. Has a project, and flat foamboard, probably. So he takes the F117 approach. Not a fan of radical facet geometries myself, I love the conceptual value nevertheless. Using lighter materials, differently. Exactly my point.
The counter-arguments about 'leaving good enough alone" just don't fly, longdog is right. Wally CONSTANTLY innovated.
A honeycomb composite structural floor, slide-out composite (translucent, perhaps?) shells, an operable roof terrace with int. ladder stairs, and a tent structure to cover the upper level, these are concepts that could derive great innovative effectiveness. This is what I mean about design-driven vernacular.
Chris Deam did a great leap in simplifying interiors. Some like the granny-look cabs, he didn't. I'm simply stating that with some innovative use of new materials increased floor area, lighter tow weight and greater structural rigidity are possible, AT a lower cost. As Moonstruck mentions with pragmatism and expediency, this IS beauty and utility.
The "don't mess with tradition-leave it alone" concept is corrupt because change is constant, even in business. Thor and Airstream think conservatively because their Classic training and box-like thinking are habitually enforcing. No need to change until radical new designs FORCE them to react. This problewm is that then the Nø 1 is reacting to market. As Ries and Trout state in 22 Laws of Marketing, the leader has to constantly innovate to keep the other competitors to reacting in therir design layouts. On the defensive they can never increase marketshare.
Moonstruck, AS is no longer radical, in fact I never think they were. Perception varies, and the public is mutable.
qdp
I would tend to agree that the Airstream is not definitively radical. I'm on record as saying that it is derivative of technological advances in the early 20th Century. If you want to highlight an example of a market leader who constantly innovates, look no further than my second love, Apple Macintosh. Although, if you know anything of their history, it is the strong leader, Steve Jobs who singularly drove them back from failure to success. I repeat that future developments will find their time and I believe energy efficiency will be at the top of the list. This will force design innovation into a niche market for those who can still afford to waste.
Quick Links
Hi, the cars in this article are very sleek and aerodynamic looking so I would expect something similar with the trailer. The trailer, to me, looks like an aerodynamic disaster. Hard to describe; Ice sculpture or lead crystal vase on it's side? No Sale!
Linear Mode
