Electric aircraft for shorter trips instead of trains. The battery energy density still needs to improve somewhat but that is happening. They’d allow for serving more direct (point to point) routes than trains as the infrastructure cost is so much lower than laying and maintaining tracks. Rail serving high volume routes still makes sense, especially while electric plans remain relatively small.
I might be wrong but this seems like a very US-centric idea. For most of the developed world trains fill this need very well, while the US has had problems with their rail network for reasons partially based on geography, partially based on population density, and partially based on their own fault. I think this explains it pretty well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbEfzuCLoAQ The solution is not aircraft, the sol…
Re: Ask HN: What non-obvious tech/market may take off in the next few years?
#171I thought it would be more appealing in cities with horrid traffic jams like Jakarta. Public transport exists, but can never be as good as it could be in a place without city planning. We've had staff from there work remote, because commuting to the office would take half a day (one-way). We've literally flown them to an office in another country to get access to the hardware they were working on because it was easier than getting into the main office.