|
|
|
|
|
|
by masklinn
1605 days ago
|
|
|
> So it is huge, but well within historic capabilities - and materials science has come a long way since then. I'm quietly hopeful for this. The problem is not building the thing (though it is one problem), it's that if you're using this as a crane you're moving an entire baseball field with a decimeter if not centimeter-scale precision. |
|
|
I have no intuitive feel for how heavy 250 tonnes is, but even if current crane tech can move that weight with centimeter precision, they're explicitly marketing this for tasks where the current tech has issues with access, which implies they don't think it competes directly with traditional cranes on their own territory, but does work well enough in specific circumstances to be an option.
Maybe its a bad idea overall, or unrelated business model issues render it a dead-end, but beating the current product in every concievable metric in every concievable use case is not necesssry for a product to be a success.