Boulder police seeking suspects in robbery spree
Feb 23rd
Police seek suspects in two robberies, one theft
Police in Boulder are investigating two robberies and a theft that occurred recently and are attempting to locate the suspects who are involved. Police do not believe the cases are related.
Case # 12-2371
A theft took place on Feb. 19 at approximately 12:30 a.m. The male victim was with friends at a restaurant in the 1300 block of Broadway and had gone outside for a few minutes. The victim told police that two men approached him and demanded his wallet. The victim complied.
One suspect is described as being 6’1” to 6’2” tall and weighing about 180 pounds. He has brown hair and an earring in one ear. At the time of the theft, he was wearing a dark shirt and jeans. The other male suspect had brown hair and was of average build. There is no clothing description for the second suspect. Anyone with information is asked to call Detective Tom Dowd at 303-441-3385. No one was injured in this incident.
Case # 12-2345
Also on Feb. 19, a male victim was robbed in the north alley of the 2100 block of Goss Circle at 10:01 a.m. The victim told investigators that he was heading to his parked car when a male suspect approached him and demanded his cell phone. The victim laughed at the suspect, and the suspect cut the victim’s face with a knife. The victim was taken to the hospital to be treated for his injury.
The suspect in this theft is described as a Hispanic male in his late 20s, about 5’8” tall and “skinny,” probably weighing less than 125 pounds. He had short, curly hair and light brown eyes. The suspect was wearing a black hoodie, black pants and black shoes. A black and white bandana covered most of his face. Detective Jeremy Frenzen is the lead investigator. He can be reached at 303-441-1890.
Case # 12-2437
Another robbery took place at Pleasures, located at 2801 Iris, on Feb. 21. A clerk at the store says a male suspect approached him at about 8:10 p.m., displayed a handgun and demanded money. The clerk gave the suspect cash and the suspect fled on foot. This suspect is described as a possibly Hispanic male in his mid-20s, about 5’9” – 5’10”, with an “average” build. He was wearing a light gray hoodie, dark gray sweatpants and black tennis shoes, with a black beanie-type cap, and a blue and white bandana covering most of his face. He was also wearing dark gloves. Detective Brian Scott is the lead investigator on this case, and he can be reached at 303-441-3381.
Those who have information but wish to remain anonymous may contact the Northern Colorado Crime Stoppers at 1-800-222-TIPS (8477) or 1-800-444-3776. Tips can also be submitted through the Crime Stoppers website at www.crimeshurt.com. Those submitting tips through Crime Stoppers that lead to the arrest and filing of charges on a suspect(s) may be eligible for a cash reward of up to $1,000 from Crime Stoppers.
CU student’s project UAV to “shake the ground” of rocket research
Feb 23rd
CU team’s efficient unmanned aircraft
jetting toward commercialization
jetting toward commercialization
Propulsion by a novel jet engine is the crux of the innovation behind a University of Colorado Boulder-developed aircraft that’s accelerating toward commercialization.
Jet engine technology can be small, fuel-efficient and cost-effective, at least with Assistant Professor Ryan Starkey’s design. The CU-Boulder aerospace engineer, with a team of students, has developed a first-of-its-kind supersonic unmanned aircraft vehicle, or UAV. The UAV, which is currently in a prototype state, is expected to fly farther and faster — using less fuel — than anything remotely similar to date.
The fuel efficiency of the engine that powers the 50-kilogram UAV is already double that of similar-scale engines, and Starkey says he hopes to double that efficiency again through further engineering.
Assistant Professor Ryan Starkey, left, with a team of students and one graduate, looks over = engine model nozzles for a first-of-its-kind supersonic unmanned aircraft vehicle, visible in the simulation on the computer screen, that's expected to fly farther and faster Ñ using less fuel Ñ than anything remotely similar to date. From left: Starkey, Sibylle Walter, doctoral student; Joah Deomm, master's graduate; and Greg Rancourt, master's student. (Photo by Glenn Asakawa/University of Colorado)
Starkey says his UAV could be used for everything from penetrating and analyzing storms to military reconnaissance missions — both expeditions that can require the long-distance, high-speed travel his UAV will deliver — without placing human pilots in danger. The UAV also could be used for testing low-sonic-boom supersonic transport aircraft technology, which his team is working toward designing.
The UAV is intended to shape the next generation of flight experimentation after post-World War II rocket-powered research aircraft, like the legendary North American X-15, have long been retired.
“I believe that what we’re going to do is reinvigorate the testing world, and that’s what we’re pushing to do,” said Starkey. “The group of students who are working on this are very excited because we’re not just creeping into something with incremental change, we’re creeping in with monumental change and trying to shake up the ground.”
Its thrust capacity makes the aircraft capable of reaching Mach 1.4, which is slightly faster than the speed of sound. Starkey says that regardless of the speed reached by the UAV, the aircraft will break the world record for speed in its weight class.
Its compact airframe is about 5 feet wide and 6 feet long. The aircraft costs between $50,000 and $100,000 — a relatively small price tag in a field that can advance only through testing, which sometimes means equipment loss.
Starkey’s technology — three years in the making at CU-Boulder — is transitioning into a business venture through his weeks-old Starkey Aerospace Corp., called Starcor for short. The company was incubated by eSpace, which is a CU-affiliated nonprofit organization that supports entrepreneurial space companies. Starkey’s UAV already has garnered interest from the U.S. Army, Navy, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and NASA. The acclaimed Aviation Week publication also has highlighted Starkey’s UAV.
Starkey says technology transfer is important because it parlays university research into real-life applications that advance societies and contribute to local and global economies.
It also can provide job tracks for undergraduate and graduate students, says Starkey who’s bringing some of the roughly 50 students involved in UAV development into his budding Starcor.
“There are great students everywhere, but one of the reasons why I came to CU was because of how the students are trained. We definitely make sure they understand everything from circuit board wiring to going into the shop and building something,” said Starkey. “It makes them very effective and powerful even as fresh engineers with bachelor’s degrees. They’re very good students to hire. That’s a piece that I’m interested in embracing — finding the really good talent that we have right here in Colorado and pulling it into the company.”
Starkey and his students are currently creating a fully integrated and functioning engineering test unit of the UAV, which will be followed by a critical design review after resolving any problems. The building of the aircraft and process of applying for FAA approval to test it in the air will carry into next year.
Starkey’s continuing fascination with speed first began to burn inside of him when he visited Kennedy Space Center at the age of 5.
“When I teach I tell my class, ‘If it goes fast and gets hot, I’m in it.’ That’s what I want to do. There needs to be fire involved somewhere.”
-C
Tesla Motors’ Devastating Design Problem
Feb 23rd
This story came to us yesterday/Tesla Motors seemed too good to be true when they launched their first show room here in Boulder. And it was. We looked at the new car when it came out and immediately saw, it was impossible to get into unless you were a 135 lb skinny person. The outrageous price on an electric sports car made it so niche, that it did not rate a review then. In a City like Boulder where the money came from for this Hi tech kid car, everyone drank the cool aide. As professional Auto reviewers our team didn;t see it. Below is a blistering report on the Tesla Failure
FROM Understatement.com
By Michael Degusta
Tesla Motors’ lineup of all-electric vehicles — its existing Roadster, almost certainly its impending Model S, and possibly its future Model X — apparently suffer from a severe limitation that can largely destroy the value of the vehicle. If the battery is ever totally discharged, the owner is left with what Tesla describes as a “brick”: a completely immobile vehicle that cannot be started or even pushed down the street. The only known remedy is for the owner to pay Tesla approximately $40,000 to replace the entire battery. Unlike practically every other modern car problem, neither Tesla’s warranty nor typical car insurance policies provide any protection from this major financial loss. Here’s how it happens.
Despite this “brick” scenario having occurred several times already, Tesla has publicly downplayed the severity of battery depletion risk to both existing owners and future buyers. Privately though, Tesla has gone to great lengths to prevent this potentially brand-destroying incident from happening more often, including possibly engaging in GPS tracking of a vehicle without the owner’s knowledge. UPDATE!
NOTE (UPDATED!): The argument outlined in this story by Michael DeGusta that originally appeared on theunderstatement.com has been confirmed by Tesla with the following statement:
All automobiles require some level of owner care. For example, combustion vehicles require regular oil changes or the engine will be destroyed. Electric vehicles should be plugged in and charging when not in use for maximum performance. All batteries are subject to damage if the charge is kept at zero for long periods of time. However, Tesla avoids this problem in virtually all instances with numerous counter-measures. Tesla batteries can remain unplugged for weeks (even months), without reaching zero state of charge. Owners of Roadster 2.0 and all subsequent Tesla products can request that their vehicle alert Tesla if SOC falls to a low level. All Tesla vehicles emit various visual and audible warnings if the battery pack falls below 5 percent SOC. Tesla provides extensive maintenance recommendations as part of the customer experience.
— Ed.
How To Brick An Electric Car
A Tesla Roadster that is simply parked without being plugged in will eventually become a “brick”. The parasitic load from the car’s always-on subsystems continually drains the battery and if the battery’s charge is ever totally depleted, it is essentially destroyed. Complete discharge can happen even when the car is plugged in if it isn’t receiving sufficient current to charge, which can be caused by something as simple as using an extension cord. After battery death, the car is completely inoperable. At least in the case of the Tesla Roadster, it’s not even possible to enable tow mode, meaning the wheels will not turn and the vehicle cannot be pushed nor transported to a repair facility by traditional means.
The amount of time it takes an unplugged Tesla to die varies. Tesla’s Roadster Owners Manual [Full Zipped PDF] states that the battery should take approximately 11 weeks of inactivity to completely discharge [Page 5-2, Column 3: PDF]. However, that is from a full 100% charge. If the car has been driven first, say to be parked at an airport for a long trip, that time can be substantially reduced. If the car is driven to nearly its maximum range and then left unplugged, it could potentially “brick” in about one week.[1] Many other scenarios are possible: for example, the car becomes unplugged by accident, or is unwittingly plugged into an extension cord that is defective or too long.
When a Tesla battery does reach total discharge, it cannot be recovered and must be entirely replaced. Unlike a normal car battery, the best-case replacement cost of the Tesla battery is currently at least $32,000, not including labor and taxes that can add thousands more to the cost.
Five Examples And Counting
Of the approximately 2,200 Roadsters sold to date, a regional service manager for Tesla stated he was personally aware of at least five cases of Tesla Roadsters being “bricked” due to battery depletion. It is unknown if there are additional cases in other regions or countries.
The 340th Tesla Roadster produced went to a customer in Santa Barbara, California. In 2011, he took his Roadster out for a drive and then parked it in a temporary garage while his home was being renovated. Lacking a built-in Tesla charger or a convenient power outlet, he left the car unplugged. Six weeks later his car was dead. It took four men two hours to drag the 2,700-pound Roadster onto a flatbed truck so that it could be shipped to Tesla’s Los Angeles area service center, all at the owner’s expense. A service manager then informed him that “it’s a brick” and that the battery would cost approximately $40,000 to replace. He was further told that this was a special “friends and family” price, strongly implying that Tesla generally charges more.
As a second Roadster owner discovered, the Tesla battery system can completely discharge even when the vehicle is plugged in. This owner’s car was plugged into a 100-foot long extension cord for an extended period. The length of this extension cord evidently reduced the electric current to a level insufficient to charge the Tesla, resulting in another “bricked” Roadster.
A third bricked Tesla Roadster apparently sits in its owner’s garage in Newport Beach, California. That owner allegedly had a similar prior incident with a BMW-produced electric vehicle. He claimed BMW replaced that vehicle, but Tesla refuses to do the same. The owner either couldn’t afford or didn’t want to pay Tesla the $40,000 (or more) to fix his car.
A fourth customer shipped his Tesla Roadster to Japan, reportedly only to discover the voltages there were incompatible. By then, it was too late, the car was bricked, and he had to ship it back to the US for repairs.
The whereabouts and circumstances of the fifth bricked Roadster the Tesla service manager expressed knowledge of are unknown.
No Warranty, No Insurance, No Payment Plan
Tesla has a “bumper to bumper” warranty [Page 3: PDF], but the warranty text allows Tesla to hold the owner responsible for any damage related to “Failure to maintain the Battery at a proper charge level at all times” – the meaning of “proper charge” doesn’t appear to be specifically defined. Tesla CEO Elon Musk, Vice President of Sales & Ownership Experience George Blankenship, and Vice President of Worldwide Service J. Joost de Vries all became directly involved in at least one “brick” situation, with de Vries stating in writing that since Tesla’s documentation and warranty “identify in clear language to keep the Roadster on external power when parked” the decision to decline any warranty or financial relief was “correct and justified”.[2]
Unfortunately for current and future Tesla owners who encounter this problem, it’s also not covered by normal automobile insurance policies. This makes the situation almost unique in modern car-ownership: a $40,000 or more exposure that cannot be insured. After all, car insurance is designed to protect owners and drivers even when they are neglectful or at fault. The affected customers probably would have been in a better financial situation if they’d accidentally rolled their Teslas off a cliff, as insurance would generally cover much of those costs.
Due to Tesla batteries naturally decaying over time, Tesla offered Roadster customers a $12,000 “battery replacement program”. This program is intended to replace a Roadster battery with a new one seven years after purchase. When asked, the Tesla service manager said even if owners had paid in advance for this replacement battery program, they would not be allowed to use it to replace an accidentally discharged battery – they would have to pay the full $40,000-plus cost.[3]
The Santa Barbara owner was also informed that no other financing or payment plan would be made available to pay for the replacement battery, and that he needed to either pay in full or remove his dead vehicle from the Tesla service center as soon as possible.
Understated Warnings to Owners
With such a large price tag for a bricked vehicle, it would be reasonable to expect Tesla to go to great lengths to ensure their customers were fully aware of the severity of battery discharge. Instead it seems that Tesla, while working to make it clear their vehicles should always be left plugged in, also appears to have focused on trying not to spook their current and future customers about the potentially severe ramifications of complete battery discharge.
The Tesla Roadster Owners Manual begins with several “Important Notes About Your Vehicle” [Page 1-2: PDF], none of which make any mention of battery discharge. In Chapter 5 of the manual, where vehicle charging is addressed, Tesla states that the vehicle is “designed to be plugged in” and that allowing the charge level to fall to 0% “can permanently damage the Battery.” [Page 5-2: PDF] It does not specify that a completely discharged battery may need to be replaced, entirely at the owner’s expense, at a cost that could be the majority of the value of the vehicle.
Tesla did begin handing out a “Battery Reminder Card” [PDF] when a Roadster was brought in for servicing. However, the card gently and cheerfully prods owners to “Remember – a connected Roadster is a happy Roadster!” with no mention of the possible consequences of a complete discharge.
There is no warning regarding battery discharge on the actual power port of the vehicle itself, where a gas-powered car often contains warnings about issues like the use of leaded gasoline in an unleaded vehicle. There is also no warning on the power port or in the Roadster Owner’s manual regarding the use of extension cords.
for more on this story see understatement.com where it first appeared.
