Live data from Hacker News

Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars

vox.com

61–70 of 242 posts

Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars

#61
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pilot training time. At the Hiller Museum in San Mateo one of the docents was talking about how helicopters seem so great but they are so hard to fly with the pilot managing rotor pitch, rotor speed, and countering torque with the tail rotor. A typical quad/hexa/octo copter type vehicle is much easier to fly. (as is a gyrocopter but it cannot really take off vertically)

>A typical quad/hexa/octo copter type vehicle is much easier to fly They're easier to fly because they have software providing artificial stability. If you had to control each rotor individually it would be virtually impossible. There's no reason in principle why a helicopter couldn't have similarly straightforward controls.

Yes, I've wondered that.

Why not provide a joystick for translation motion, rudder pedals for rotation, and a lever for ascending and descending? Allow the human to provide simple inputs, like: tilt the stick forward to go forward. No other inputs required. Aircraft will remain at the same altitude while it tilts forward and gains airspeed.

The computer consumes all of these controls, understands what the human wants to do, and then makes the necessary low-level adjustments. I suppose one obstacle to this plan is that the helicopter would need to be entirely fly-by-wire, and there would be no fallback to manual control. This would likely make the helicopter more complex and expensive.

Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? With self driving, it makes a hell of a lot more sense than autonomous cars. Any point in a 30 mile typical travel radius is a <15 minute flight.

^ This. Think about the capacity constraints during your typical commute. All those times you have ever been held up in traffic could be massively diminished thanks to increase short-hop flight commutes.

Why do you think the airspace won't have traffic?

You want to end traffic with modern accessible tech?

Build ten layer freeways.

Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars

#63
post #31

Do we actually want flying cars? They are probably less efficient because you have to overcome gravity, they are probably going to be pretty noisy, falling out of the sky and smashing into the ground is a new failure mode, ... Flying cars are certainly a nice gadget, but do we really need or want them? I can only think of two good arguments for flying cars, entering the third dimension if we run out of space on the s…

Yes we do! That's one of the things that is slowing down the whole civilization -- inability to quickly and efficiently travel especially into the places when we need to gather to do work.

Opening a new dimension will be like switching from a horse to a first Ford car - day and night in terms of speed. Practically no more traffic jams because you can always travel at higher/lower travel channels.

> They are probably less efficient because you have to overcome gravity

Yes but eventually it might get narrow. At least you wont be stuck in traffic burning gas but constantly moving.

> they are probably going to be pretty noisy

If you plan a picnic on a silver cloud 10k feet above the ground then yes. For majority of people living in cities on the ground, it won't. I can imagine first flying cars will be very noisy just like first cars were pollution monsters... but let the Government impose fines and never-ending restrictions that will make sure car makers invest large chunks into quieting them down.

> falling out of the sky and smashing into the ground is a new failure mode

First and foremost, the only way you will fly in a car when it is 100% autonomous. There will never be a car that you can control manually. Perhaps only military/LEOs/etc, but for us civilians it won't do. Most likely by the time they fly above your heads - 10-15 years from now? most street cars will be automatic as well.

You will never own the car by the way. You won't be able to make any modifications etc. You will pay equivalent to your current car payment but you will only rent (good thing is you can always get new model without hassle of selling your old one).

In terms of smashing, I bet the first design to fly human will be made with airbags covering the whole thing, similar to the recent rover flying to the Mars. By the time you "smash" to the ground, you will be one huge bouncing ball of air.

Flying cars will move us into another lap of human evolution! No doubt about it.

Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars

#64
post #10

How's the Ehang 184 coming along?[1] That's an electric flying car, essentially a big 8-prop drone, announced last June. They're targeting short-distance travel within big, crowded cities in China. China's 1% will be able to get across Beijing in 10 minutes. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bs4nDFgVx2o

First comment makes a good observation. When a plane loses power, it glides. When a helicopter loses power, it autorotates [1]. If a single engine on a quadcopter loses power, it crashes [2]. There is work being done on mitigating this, but I don't see why you'd go for a quad versus tri- or helicopter. (Quadcopters are better than other aerial platforms at one thing: maneuverability. To get this agility they sacrific…

> If a single engine on a quadcopter loses power, it crashes

If one motor fails, the quadcopter could turn off the opposite motor and reverse the direction of one of the remaining motors, so that it is left with two opposing motors spinning in opposite direction. The torque of two motors might be enough to keep it flying. Some steering would be possible with the assistance of the third working motor which could spin in either direction as needed.

Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars

#65

Forget electric. That's just a gimmick that allows these companies to say "in five to ten years because batteries." Prove it. Make a gas powered one to prove your concept. The simplest flying machine is probably an autogyro. Automate that for point to point transport, show the automation, redundancy, and safety for urban use. Solve those real issues and then we can talk about fancy designs.

From the article: "This kind of design wouldn’t work with conventional aircraft engines because 10 engines would be way too heavy. But electric motors can be made extremely small and light, allowing even a car-size vehicle to have 10 of them."

But batteries are a significant source of weight.

Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars

#66
post #31

Do we actually want flying cars? They are probably less efficient because you have to overcome gravity, they are probably going to be pretty noisy, falling out of the sky and smashing into the ground is a new failure mode, ... Flying cars are certainly a nice gadget, but do we really need or want them? I can only think of two good arguments for flying cars, entering the third dimension if we run out of space on the s…

I certainly think "flying buses" should come before flying cars.

Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars

#67
post #31

Do we actually want flying cars? They are probably less efficient because you have to overcome gravity, they are probably going to be pretty noisy, falling out of the sky and smashing into the ground is a new failure mode, ... Flying cars are certainly a nice gadget, but do we really need or want them? I can only think of two good arguments for flying cars, entering the third dimension if we run out of space on the s…

I certainly think "flying buses" should come before flying cars.

[deleted]

Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars

#68

I'm saying it now. Flying cars for the general population is just not going to happen until the repulsor lift is invented, and ubiquitous with all aircraft. Many, many years into the future. Long after those of us on HN are gone. There is just zero need for this right now, and is just silly nonsense. Work on making our ground systems 100% safe, efficient, and reliable first.

Why not? With self driving, it makes a hell of a lot more sense than autonomous cars. Any point in a 30 mile typical travel radius is a <15 minute flight.

In theory, we might develop a vertical-liftoff flying fully-autonomous car, that starts anywhere and brings you to the free parking spot closest to the target. We would have to overcome some safety challenges, and convince society that it's safe (to even enable the needed reforms in airspace regulations).

Now even if we did all that, with current technology flight is both incredibly noisy and less fuel efficient than driving (commercial airliners are primarily efficient because hundreds of people travel in one vehicle).

It's not really a physical limitation, after all maglev trains gain fuel efficiency and noise reduction by floating. But our existing technologies for free flight just aren't good fits for cars.

Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars

#69

I'm saying it now. Flying cars for the general population is just not going to happen until the repulsor lift is invented, and ubiquitous with all aircraft. Many, many years into the future. Long after those of us on HN are gone. There is just zero need for this right now, and is just silly nonsense. Work on making our ground systems 100% safe, efficient, and reliable first.

Why not? With self driving, it makes a hell of a lot more sense than autonomous cars. Any point in a 30 mile typical travel radius is a <15 minute flight.

Because we need to think realistically, and economically. Improving, and incrementing familiar technology now. Not introducing another mess in the air. We haven't even got self-driving land vehicles, and we're just going to make the jump to aircraft that NO ONE is familiar with? We still rely on primitive controlled explosions to get off our planet. Sure it's a neat idea, but this isn't the Fifth Element world yet.

Update ground infrastructure, improve public transportation, make renewable energy a priority, get our cars driving themselves.

Post reply on HN