>flying cars
Is Larry going to be the first billionaire mental asylim patient?
Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars
201–210 of 242 posts
Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars
#202Do 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 have been working on a flying car project for years and can guarantee you that one/two seat Electrical VTOL is at least 30 years away, battery density must triple and then you have regulations. Current solutions can be airborne at maximum 15 minutes considering that FAA and other agencies require 20 minutes reserve you do the math. The Zee.aero patent design as been abandoned because they couldn't scale it to fit a…
Eh, it's not that far away if we really wanted to push it.
Just add an airfoil envelope with enough of something lighter than air(heated air, helium, w/e) to offset the weight until a decent performance point is met. The heat from the engines running could help heat the gas for added efficiency.
Hybrid airships are already being marketed by Lockheed Martin so this isn't revolutionary at all.
Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Do we actually want flying cars? There's probably a market for a vertical-takeoff vehicle serving a premium/luxury transportation niche - the same segment that is currently served by helicopters. I imagine you would still need a pilot's license and have to adhere to the rigorous FAA-maintenance schedule - so it would never be a mass-market product.
Many products (cell phones, cars, medical) started off for "the rich" and gradually became mass market. I am very surprised at how many people are not able to see a future where general purpose ground based transportation is obsolete.
It'll happen once the strict licensing is no longer needed. Currently the necessary training for flying is too long and expensive for most people.
Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars
#204huh, it looks like he might be under the mistaken impression that he's actually pouring it into small airplanes, as was I after reading the article.
A self-piloting VTOL small airplane is about the nearest thing we will get from a flying car in a long while.
sure, in the same way the pancakes I am going to make for breakfast is the closest thing I am going to have to waffles today but if someone is going to ask me what I had for breakfast I won't tell them 'waffles'.
Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars
#205Do 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…
There are advantages that can make them more efficient:
- Straight line transportation, saving energy & time
- Faster speedwise
- No infrastructure needed, software is basically infrastructure
- Can handle rough terrain with less maintenance
- Can deal with traffic better or have more concurrent bandwidth.
- Can allow cities to de-concentrate and people to live further away. Our model at the moment is the city model where everyone needs to live in population centers to work well.
- Less time wasted in lifts if the car is parked on the terrace.
- Less need of properties to be adjacent to roads or the cost basis of new developments to be cheaper.
- No driving needed, simplistic autopilot can work.
- No bridges needed to cross water bodies.
I would argue there's no need to ask if people want or need it, it's one of those things everyone has dreamt with lust about at some stage or another.
Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many products (cell phones, cars, medical) started off for "the rich" and gradually became mass market. I am very surprised at how many people are not able to see a future where general purpose ground based transportation is obsolete.
It'll happen once the strict licensing is no longer needed. Currently the necessary training for flying is too long and expensive for most people.
And this is where the autonomous flying is coming into place: you will not fly this car at all. Software will be certified for this.
Which means:
1. wait for tesla like autonomous software that works for cars - we have for planes but this is a bit different 2. either high density batteries for electrical engines or very light weight ICE engines ( biodiesel or bio ethanol ) to be mass produced
Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars
#207Do 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…
There are advantages that can make them more efficient: - Straight line transportation, saving energy & time - Faster speedwise - No infrastructure needed, software is basically infrastructure - Can handle rough terrain with less maintenance - Can deal with traffic better or have more concurrent bandwidth. - Can allow cities to de-concentrate and people to live further away. Our model at the moment is the city model…
Straight line transportation
Roads are quite straight over long distances, and planes don't fly in straight lines if there's something in the way (eg a storm). I wonder if there'd really be that much difference on a journey longer than a few hundred miles.
Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars
#208Larry Page receives millions every week through automatic sales of his Google stock. I'd guess this project is for impressing his buddy Richard Branson and any other star he'd like to hang out with.
Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars
#209Do 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…
Isn't that like someone in the 19th century predicting that automobiles will never happen because rail is so much more effective, comfortable, safe? Convenience and flexibility always seem to win in the end.
Rail and electrified commuter air could be complementary. Nothing beats rail for moving large number of people efficiently.
Re: Larry Page is pouring millions into flying cars
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
For electrical VTOL the Joby is probably the best bet, one big question mark is, the 16 motors how much will weight even at a very low weight of 15kg each you get 240kg/52lb in motors a similar complete two person glider weights around 300kg/661lb.
Motors will be more like 1kg each. One can get a 10 kilowatt 1 kg air cooled motor. Batteries are the heavy bit, and in my opinion, the future there is to have batteries capable of 2 minutes of flying, and a gasoline engine as a hybrid generator.
don't know if you ou will manage lift with 160kw will depend on overall weight, you also have to factor the weight of the propeller and rotating mechanism and covers so 10 to 15 kg is not exaggerated.