Roads are a lot more permissive for length than width. So you can disassemble the RV for transport you can have much more volume and area. A kind of hybrid could be a RV that would essentially be two RVs that are supposed to be parked next to each other and bolted onto each other before usage for living (each “car half” containing half of a room). A single-wagon RV you can stop anywhere or even use when in transit.
It makes me wonder why RV are not the focus of car maker R&D efforts and what would make mobile homes differently qualify for it. If one would ban firmly attached houses then house pressures would move over to RVs, but RV market remains small compared to housing market, suggesting that people really don’t find RV anyway a substitute for houses. If you could detach rather than demolish a house then you might be able to pimp it up in renovation budjet scales rather than reconstruction scales. Then the attractiveness would come from having a very house-like item in a very car-like price.
But this might require than rather than to build houses to last for 10 or 50 years we build them to to last 100 to 500 years. I could very well see that a problem would be that the upkeep costs are significant in comparison to funding costs, ie that if you start of with an old wall trying to get to the result of a new wall might cost more throught repair/renovation rather than starting from scratch.
One noteworthy thing from what I found is that a common technique for RVs is for them to sort of “expand outwards once they’r parked”. i.e. they have some collapsed sections that you don’t drive around in, but let them be “bigger on the inside.”
One could combine the effects to get even more room. And in fact I am not sure what bolting the parts together really accomplishes. You could have one RV with good kitchen and no bedroom and another with no kitchen and good bedroom. Then the downside would be taht you would have to go outside when changing rooms and exposing two outdoors for anyone trying to break in (and maybe the hassle whether you want to lock the doors when you are not present in one half or move through the doors). You could lay mats or other pavement to faciliate movement from one to the next.
One could maybe also make the modules link together water and data connnection wise? Then the whole network would only need one outward connection point. We don’t plug appliances into powered stands, we plug them into the wall.
A very low-tech option that would require less development woud be to just repurpose a parking carrage as as a RV park. That would get density a lot closer to skyrises. But marketing wise living in a parking tower seems like a challenge. What kind of improvements would need to be made into a parking tower to turn it comparable to a suburban neighbourhood or just the experience of elevatorspaces and hallways of a aparment highrise?
Roads are a lot more permissive for length than width. So you can disassemble the RV for transport you can have much more volume and area. A kind of hybrid could be a RV that would essentially be two RVs that are supposed to be parked next to each other and bolted onto each other before usage for living (each “car half” containing half of a room). A single-wagon RV you can stop anywhere or even use when in transit.
It makes me wonder why RV are not the focus of car maker R&D efforts and what would make mobile homes differently qualify for it. If one would ban firmly attached houses then house pressures would move over to RVs, but RV market remains small compared to housing market, suggesting that people really don’t find RV anyway a substitute for houses. If you could detach rather than demolish a house then you might be able to pimp it up in renovation budjet scales rather than reconstruction scales. Then the attractiveness would come from having a very house-like item in a very car-like price.
But this might require than rather than to build houses to last for 10 or 50 years we build them to to last 100 to 500 years. I could very well see that a problem would be that the upkeep costs are significant in comparison to funding costs, ie that if you start of with an old wall trying to get to the result of a new wall might cost more throught repair/renovation rather than starting from scratch.
One noteworthy thing from what I found is that a common technique for RVs is for them to sort of “expand outwards once they’r parked”. i.e. they have some collapsed sections that you don’t drive around in, but let them be “bigger on the inside.”
I think this is an example (not 100% sure)
One could combine the effects to get even more room. And in fact I am not sure what bolting the parts together really accomplishes. You could have one RV with good kitchen and no bedroom and another with no kitchen and good bedroom. Then the downside would be taht you would have to go outside when changing rooms and exposing two outdoors for anyone trying to break in (and maybe the hassle whether you want to lock the doors when you are not present in one half or move through the doors). You could lay mats or other pavement to faciliate movement from one to the next.
One could maybe also make the modules link together water and data connnection wise? Then the whole network would only need one outward connection point. We don’t plug appliances into powered stands, we plug them into the wall.
A very low-tech option that would require less development woud be to just repurpose a parking carrage as as a RV park. That would get density a lot closer to skyrises. But marketing wise living in a parking tower seems like a challenge. What kind of improvements would need to be made into a parking tower to turn it comparable to a suburban neighbourhood or just the experience of elevatorspaces and hallways of a aparment highrise?