Let me elaborate a bit: the french page of this article was created on June 24, by a new account; his only contributions are to the French page. If you follow the links on this page here, you will drop right on some enterprises pages. As far as I can see, there is only one enterprise manufacturing this type of vehicle right now...if we want to keep this article, there has to be a major rewrite. Lectonar 09:57, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the page emerges from a vanity article. I cut out a lot of stuff. Can we just wait to see if some people who know about new developments in vehicles can come and balance the page out a bit? failing that the article should be reduced to a stub. Not deleted because this does seem to be a genuine emerging technology. Itsmejudith

I would like to see most of this information move: the greater part would be useful in balancing out the POV-heavy Air car, and the rest would complement Air engine. "Compressed air vehicle(s)" could easily redirect to Air car. (I understand that to be a generic term, though MDI Inc is currently jockeying for position as its poster child. I don't know what words should really be the title: Pneumatic/Compressed-air car/automobile/vehicle/engine/motor. Then again, maybe some of this stuff really fits in Compressed air which is now just a disambiguation page.)

But I'm nervous about messing with text which currently has its own edit trail. Should I copy-and-paste this stuff into the destination page, perhaps trying to give credit in an edit summary, then perform any actual editing in a separate operation? Should I just borrow ideas instead? --Egmonster 09:57, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not confident enough in my physics to take this line out, but I doubt that pneumatic engines are "Not affected by ambient temperature or humidity" since the expansive force of compressed air depends on available thermal energy. Egmonster 22:02, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think what it means is that whereas a battery could corrode more quickly if operated in a hot humid climate, a pneumatic engine could in theory cope with such a climate better. I shall reword. Of course, the "advantages" ought to be balanced by "disadvantages" but since the engines are still all in prototype the disadvantages in practice have yet to emerge. Itsmejudith 07:45, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merge, or rather rationalisation of the series of articles. Most of the technical detail to go into a new Compressed air engine article. This title for the types of vehicles that are in development or proposed by the companies involved in this technology. To me, "compressed air vehicles" is more neutral and informative than "air car", which sounds like a marketing term. Itsmejudith 09:38, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I was about to propose merging all the bits into air car, but after mulling it over a bit, the above strikes me as much more sensible, so I concur. Btw, does anyone know if more than cars are supposed to be built with this propulsion-system; if not, even Compressed air car strikes me as a possible article-name. Lectonar 08:49, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• • Yes, this article mentions the idea of developing motorcycles or light tourism vehicles. Itsmejudith 14:13, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• • • Definitely more than personal cars! Locomotives are the best known compressed air driven vehicles: see Air engine. (Some cities also used air streetcars before petroleum became cheap.) --Egmonster 23:01, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Besides Air engine, please note that Pneumatic motor is involved in this merge. So to a lesser extent are Compressed air and Pneumatics. There is surprisingly little overlap between information in the four pivotal articles (two vehicle and two pneumatic engine). --Egmonster too

• Oh, and Compressed air energy storage might need some of the data here, too. --Egmonster 22:42, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]