Supercharger - Newark, DE

[Lanny]

Here is another picture of the historic Tesla Owner's anti-Broder trip (which started on February 16, 2013 at the Delaware Supercharger) :smile

Yep, the @TeslaRoadTrip New York Times Debunking was Newark's first crowd. At least nine cars there. Broder is a verb.

Lanny

 

[vgrinshpun]

BTW, I am in the picture above (in glasses) with one of my sons, talking to a MS owner from MA. My second son was extracting every little piece of information he could from other MS owners - by the superchargers :biggrin:. That was a very exciting and memorable day.

 

[Andrew Berman]

I am sure someone responsible reads these things... and if a number speak up then maybe they'll listen... Specifically, PLEASE ADD FOUR MORE SC STALLS IN NEWARK!

Thank you.

 

[paulkva]

I am sure someone responsible reads these things... and if a number speak up then maybe they'll listen... Specifically, PLEASE ADD FOUR MORE SC STALLS IN NEWARK!

Thank you.

Just four more? Really? If I'm going to ask publicly I'm going to go big. Future growth and all, right? (By the way Andrew, welcome to TMC. I travel up to Bridgewater a few times per year to visit in-laws.)

I'd really like to see 8+ additional stalls in an area that's easily accessible to both northbound and southbound traffic. For example, what I posted previously in this thread (#75 -- Supercharger - Newark, DE - Page 8). Or maybe near the new stand-alone Starbucks. Another 4+ on the northbound side would be nice too, but if I were given the choice, I'd rather have more in one place than have them scattered throughout the property.

Looking at Google Maps, there are huge overhead power lines running alongside I-95, right past the rest area, so I have to imagine that adding power wouldn't be a problem. But I'm not an electrician and I don't work for a utility, so I could believe it if someone tells me there's a reason they can't add enough power to support 16+ stalls. Regardless of what happens in Newark, I also think we should ask for additional locations relatively nearby, such as Philadelphia (~40mi) and Baltimore (~65mi).

I've said variants of all this before. We know Tesla monitors these forums (although not precisely how closely they do so), and we know they have detailed data on supercharger usage. From what they've told several people here, they are working on adding capacity. But nobody has any idea when, how much, or where.

 

[CHRGIT]

I wonder if adding additional capacity might require temporarily closing the Newark Suprcharger? If so, that might explain a delay in adding capacity until surrounding stations are open. Tesla could be waiting to open Allentown and the mystery Maryland suburb location first. As it stands right now, if Newark were to temporarily close, it is almost 200 miles between Hamilton marketplace and Woodbridge (skipping the terrible Bethesda location).

 

[AlMc]

I wonder if adding additional capacity might require temporarily closing the Newark Suprcharger? If so, that might explain a delay in adding capacity until surrounding stations are open. Tesla could be waiting to open Allentown and the mystery Maryland suburb location first. As it stands right now, if Newark were to temporarily close, it is almost 200 miles between Hamilton marketplace and Woodbridge (skipping the terrible Bethesda location).

Your assertion has merit but I suspect if they had to close down the current site (not sure they would have to) I think that adding a 4-8 bay area in the mid parking area/new stand alone Starbucks area first, then closing down the original site for additional stalls, would be the logical thing to do.

 

[Max*]

I don't think they need 8 more stalls. I think 4 more and a few more locations along 95 would be a better alternative (add one to one of the rest areas in MD, and you're done. I forgot which one is closer to DE, Chesapeake house?).

I always have charge anxiety when I pull up to DE. Showed up Sunday night at 7pm, and I was the only car there. I was very surprised. Though as I was pulling out 2, more Tesla's were driving up.

 

[Zarwin]

I don't think they need 8 more stalls. I think 4 more and a few more locations along 95 would be a better alternative

In the near term this may be a better alternative, but I'd hope Tesla is already thinking about larger scale hub locations, something like "Megachargers" for heavy travel corridors like this one. Instead of four separate 8 stall implementations 3 miles apart, one large 32 stall implementation would be much more efficient and could serve many more cars with the same number of stalls. For most people this doesn't make much sense, its the same number of stalls, but if you treated superchargers like call centers it starts to make more sense.

4 different 800 numbers with 8 agents each. No intelligent routing assumed and callers choose one of the four numbers themselves randomly. This will cause situation where callers are waiting in queue on one number with agents playing candy crush on another since they aren't servicing a call. Some callers wait in queue and then hang up and dial another one of the numbers, maybe getting straight to an agent, maybe hitting a bigger queue. If the agents are superchargers and the callers are cars, it's the same thing really.

This is why single site chargers, like single port CHAdeMO scattered around can't scale. Imagine a call center with 32 agents, each with their own separate phone number, and you have to choose randomly until you find one that isn't busy, or wait on hold not knowing how long the previous caller will be on the line.

EDIT: wanted to clarify, I'm not saying you meant a few more locations 3 miles apart, that was just an example of some time in the future when we are at a density that adding locations may be just a few miles down the road from each other on major corridors. Right now it certainly does make sense to add locations until a saturation level is hit.

 

[paulkva]

Yeah I'm thinking longer term, i.e. when Model 3 is released plus additional years of S/X sales, especially given how long we've already been talking about Newark needing more capacity. If Tesla adds 4 stalls now and does nothing else, I predict we'll be having the same conversation again in 2 years or less. And if they add more 4-6-stall locations instead of expanding Newark, I predict the benefit will be limited unless/until the touchscreen can show us usage patterns at each location over the past several hours. Though if they add a couple 8-stall locations nearby, many of us will end up favoring those over Newark, and perhaps that would solve the problem at least through the initial Model 3 release. I certainly hope that all new locations along I-95 have at least 8 stalls each.

 

[AlMc]

In the near term this may be a better alternative, but I'd hope Tesla is already thinking about larger scale hub locations, something like "Megachargers" for heavy travel corridors like this one. Instead of four separate 8 stall implementations 3 miles apart, one large 32 stall implementation would be much more efficient and could serve many more cars with the same number of stalls. For most people this doesn't make much sense, its the same number of stalls, but if you treated superchargers like call centers it starts to make more sense.

4 different 800 numbers with 8 agents each. No intelligent routing assumed and callers choose one of the four numbers themselves randomly. This will cause situation where callers are waiting in queue on one number with agents playing candy crush on another since they aren't servicing a call. Some callers wait in queue and then hang up and dial another one of the numbers, maybe getting straight to an agent, maybe hitting a bigger queue. If the agents are superchargers and the callers are cars, it's the same thing really.

This is why single site chargers, like single port CHAdeMO scattered around can't scale. Imagine a call center with 32 agents, each with their own separate phone number, and you have to choose randomly until you find one that isn't busy, or wait on hold not knowing how long the previous caller will be on the line.

EDIT: wanted to clarify, I'm not saying you meant a few more locations 3 miles apart, that was just an example of some time in the future when we are at a density that adding locations may be just a few miles down the road from each other on major corridors. Right now it certainly does make sense to add locations until a saturation level is hit.

I am all for your concept IF they are placed in places that also access food services/amenities. Facilities encompassing 24-32 stalls will take considerable space so a place such as the Delaware hospitality center may not be amenable.

 

[jaguar36]

In the near term this may be a better alternative, but I'd hope Tesla is already thinking about larger scale hub locations, something like "Megachargers" for heavy travel corridors like this one. Instead of four separate 8 stall implementations 3 miles apart, one large 32 stall implementation would be much more efficient and could serve many more cars with the same number of stalls. For most people this doesn't make much sense, its the same number of stalls, but if you treated superchargers like call centers it starts to make more sense.

But Superchargers aren't call centers. Spacing them out makes alot more sense for a couple reasons. First off is the power requirements. a 32 supercharger site would take a ridiculous amount of power. Spreading the superchargers out allows for alot more flexibility, if you're not going past Newark it doesn't matter how many open bays there are there. Same thing if there is an accident near Newark, if thats the only site, you can't go around the traffic. Lastly, Tesla will undoubtedly implement some sort of status display for the superchargers at some point, allowing more dynamic balancing which will eliminate the benefit of a large site.

Probably some good marketing reasons for a massive site though, I know I was excited to see the 20 stall Fremont site.

 

[Max*]

In the near term this may be a better alternative, but I'd hope Tesla is already thinking about larger scale hub locations, something like "Megachargers" for heavy travel corridors like this one. Instead of four separate 8 stall implementations 3 miles apart, one large 32 stall implementation would be much more efficient and could serve many more cars with the same number of stalls. For most people this doesn't make much sense, its the same number of stalls, but if you treated superchargers like call centers it starts to make more sense.

4 different 800 numbers with 8 agents each. No intelligent routing assumed and callers choose one of the four numbers themselves randomly. This will cause situation where callers are waiting in queue on one number with agents playing candy crush on another since they aren't servicing a call. Some callers wait in queue and then hang up and dial another one of the numbers, maybe getting straight to an agent, maybe hitting a bigger queue. If the agents are superchargers and the callers are cars, it's the same thing really.

This is why single site chargers, like single port CHAdeMO scattered around can't scale. Imagine a call center with 32 agents, each with their own separate phone number, and you have to choose randomly until you find one that isn't busy, or wait on hold not knowing how long the previous caller will be on the line.

EDIT: wanted to clarify, I'm not saying you meant a few more locations 3 miles apart, that was just an example of some time in the future when we are at a density that adding locations may be just a few miles down the road from each other on major corridors. Right now it certainly does make sense to add locations until a saturation level is hit.

I understand your point, though I disagree with it. Sure, if resources were infinite let them put 8 more stalls in DE, and 8 stalls on every rest area on the NJT, and then 8 stalls on the 2 rest areas between Baltimore and DE.

But if we had only 8 stalls to install, I'd put 4 in DE and 4 in MD. Going from DC to [anywhere north], I try to skip DE and charge with a much lower SOC in NJ. Going south, I can't do that, since after DE the next SpC is the 2-stall Baltimore one and then Woodbridge. So I end up arriving to DE with a medium SOC, taking more time than I'd need to charge, to continue my trip.

So I think it makes more logical sense (assuming you only have 8 stalls to install), put 4 in DE to increase the capacity as it's often full (I've never seen a line, but I've read about it here), and install 4 more somewhere between DC and DE to further alleviate the DE congestion.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah I'm thinking longer term, i.e. when Model 3 is released plus additional years of S/X sales, especially given how long we've already been talking about Newark needing more capacity. If Tesla adds 4 stalls now and does nothing else, I predict we'll be having the same conversation again in 2 years or less. And if they add more 4-6-stall locations instead of expanding Newark, I predict the benefit will be limited unless/until the touchscreen can show us usage patterns at each location over the past several hours. Though if they add a couple 8-stall locations nearby, many of us will end up favoring those over Newark, and perhaps that would solve the problem at least through the initial Model 3 release. I certainly hope that all new locations along I-95 have at least 8 stalls each.

^^ This. Agreed.

Put more in DE, and put more elsewhere. Putting lots of resources into DE and not expanding 95 from Woodbridge to DE is not going to solve the problem longterm.

 

[jdo]

But Superchargers aren't call centers. Spacing them out makes alot more sense for a couple reasons. First off is the power requirements. a 32 supercharger site would take a ridiculous amount of power. Spreading the superchargers out allows for alot more flexibility, if you're not going past Newark it doesn't matter how many open bays there are there. Same thing if there is an accident near Newark, if thats the only site, you can't go around the traffic. Lastly, Tesla will undoubtedly implement some sort of status display for the superchargers at some point, allowing more dynamic balancing which will eliminate the benefit of a large site.

Probably some good marketing reasons for a massive site though, I know I was excited to see the 20 stall Fremont site.

I agree with this. From the driver's viewpoint, more locations is always going to be a more efficient traveling solution than more stations at fewer locations. (However, in the short term, it may not be the most cost efficient solution for Tesla.)

Because charging is still relatively slow (compared to fueling), to make best use of more locations, Tesla will have to implement a means of communicating where the open chargers are. This will be even more critical once the Model 3 starts selling.

 

[Lanny]

Happy 3rd anniversary to the East Coast Supercharger network. Newark, DE and Milford, CT opened on December 20, 2012.

New York Times: Tesla Begins East Coast Fast-Charging Corridor

-Lanny

 

[tfinan]

A posting today on Tesla site forum indicates an expansion is coming soon. https://my.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/de-supercharger?page=2

 

[JST]

That's a nice Christmas gift, if true. If someone is on their way through and can post a pic, that would be cool.

 

[James Anders]

Considering the M3 will be here in a few years with a potentially order of magnitude more sales than the S and X, planning to go big is wise.

Plus, for the life of me I will never understand why there is no Superchargers at the nexus of I-95, PA Turnpike, Route 1 in Langhorne, Lower Bucks county. There's plenty of potential locations. There are two large shopping malls (Oxford Valley and Neshaminy) plus numerous other shopping center locations with huge parking lots.

 

[Lanny]

Merry Christmas from Newark, DE Supercharger.

-Lanny

 

[HankLloydRight]

"Supercharge Expansion coming soon" translated means "Ok, you can stop nagging up about it already!!"

Also, I'm always worried about "Tesla Time" when it comes to words like "soon".

 

[AlMc]

View attachment 105423

Merry Christmas from Newark, DE Supercharger.

-Lanny

Thanks. You beat me to it .......