Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why you have (probably) already bought your last car

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 34 posts

Re: Why you have (probably) already bought your last car

#21

Post by vidarh »

taneq wrote: post #12
vidarh wrote: post #4

I'm increasingly starting to wonder if the autonomous cars will get the chance to "win" before being replaced by "flying cars". There's half a dozen companies at least that are aiming for first flight in the next 2-3 years, and Uber-like services in the 2025 timeframe. Some, like Lilium have demonstrated flying prototypes. Companies like Lilium are claiming they'll be able to compete with and eventually beat Ubers cu…

We've had 'flying cars' for 100+ years already, and automobiles are still around. Flying just doesn't make sense (energy, safety, and practicality-wise) compared to rolling.

We haven't though. The distinction between these aircraft and typical planes being that they don't need a runway (several of them are VTOL), and are aiming to do away with the need for a pilot. The big limiting factor for small planes have been that combination of cost, inconvenience (nearest airfield to me is far enough away to make it pointless, and most places I'd want to go to don't have an airfield nearby either), and the need for a pilot.

First when you solve all three of those, you have something that is addressing the same market.

We will see whether or not it will make sense - there's now half a dozen manufacturers at least that claims to have electric aircraft in this class that are efficient enough to be comparable with electric cars in energy use. Of course it's possible they're all wrong.

Re: Why you have (probably) already bought your last car

#22

Post by dragonwriter »

vidarh wrote: post #21
taneq wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've had 'flying cars' for 100+ years already, and automobiles are still around. Flying just doesn't make sense (energy, safety, and practicality-wise) compared to rolling.

We haven't though. The distinction between these aircraft and typical planes being that they don't need a runway (several of them are VTOL), and are aiming to do away with the need for a pilot. The big limiting factor for small planes have been that combination of cost, inconvenience (nearest airfield to me is far enough away to make it pointless, and most places I'd want to go to don't have an airfield nearby either…

> there's now half a dozen manufacturers at least that claims to have electric aircraft in this class that are efficient enough to be comparable with electric cars in energy use.

You'd have to use a very loose concept of “comparable” for such claims to be plausible, but the personal flying vehicle market has been rife with vaporware draining the wallets of investors and enthusiasts (the latter through early sales of reservations for “imminent” models) long before “electric” was part of the usual pitch.

Re: Why you have (probably) already bought your last car

#23

Post by vidarh »

Carpetsmoker wrote: post #11
vidarh wrote: post #4

I'm increasingly starting to wonder if the autonomous cars will get the chance to "win" before being replaced by "flying cars". There's half a dozen companies at least that are aiming for first flight in the next 2-3 years, and Uber-like services in the 2025 timeframe. Some, like Lilium have demonstrated flying prototypes. Companies like Lilium are claiming they'll be able to compete with and eventually beat Ubers cu…

Flying cars will always be less efficient (and thus, more expensive) than driving cars due to the physics of it. I wouldn't hold my breath on flying cars replacing driving cars, just as airplanes haven't replaced trains.

> Flying cars will always be less efficient (and thus, more expensive) than driving cars due to the physics of it.

As it stands, for cars, the typical energy use is 3k-4k BTU per passenger mile. Commercial airliners use 2k-3k BTU per passenger mile. Of course those get their efficiency from packing more passengers in. But the point being that a statement like the above only makes sense when comparing comparable vehicles (the bad numbers for cars is in part because cars on average have less than 2 people in them; fill a car up, and it will do better per person than a typical plane).

However the best reported numbers I've found from test flights of electric planes is energy use as low as below 1300 BTU per mile (these numbers will also vary wildly by number of people; most prototype models in progress are for 2 people, including Lilium, though their next version will be a five seater).

Part of this is due to totally different design constraints. Of the 12 in-progress models I'm aware of, the heaviest is about 1/4th the weight of the lightest Tesla. The lightest is about 1/6th the weight of the lightest Tesla. E.g. the two-person version of the Lilium was 400kg without passengers.

Part of this again is that the cost of purchase vs. cost of operation calculations are entirely different: Most of these are designed for the hire operator market or as luxury items, and they're not even possible if they weigh too much, so much more money gets spent on expensive materials to push weight down. Their assumption is that they'll get the operational costs down far enough to amortise the increased finance costs of buying it.

Re: Why you have (probably) already bought your last car

#24

Post by vidarh »

dragonwriter wrote: post #22
vidarh wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We haven't though. The distinction between these aircraft and typical planes being that they don't need a runway (several of them are VTOL), and are aiming to do away with the need for a pilot. The big limiting factor for small planes have been that combination of cost, inconvenience (nearest airfield to me is far enough away to make it pointless, and most places I'd want to go to don't have an airfield nearby either…

> there's now half a dozen manufacturers at least that claims to have electric aircraft in this class that are efficient enough to be comparable with electric cars in energy use. You'd have to use a very loose concept of “comparable” for such claims to be plausible, but the personal flying vehicle market has been rife with vaporware draining the wallets of investors and enthusiasts (the latter through early sales of…

> You'd have to use a very loose concept of “comparable” for such claims to be plausible

There are actual flying prototypes that have gotten at least within a factor of two of electric cars, depending on respective passenger loads. How they'll come out with production models remains to be seen, and also depends greatly on average passenger counts.

People tend to overestimate how much energy flight takes - consider that both large scale commercial jets and small private aircraft are relatively comparable to cars in energy use per passenger mile, often coming out better for larger planes than cars (though admittedly largely because average passenger numbers for cars is so low).

> but the personal flying vehicle market has been rife with vaporware draining the wallets of investors and enthusiasts (the latter through early sales of reservations for “imminent” models) long before “electric” was part of the usual pitch.

That's true, and I got a good laugh of e.g. seeing a pitch from a company in this space that included the Moller SkyCar as a competitor (I'm not sure if they were serious and included it for completeness, or if it was in there as a joke; they included the year it was announced, and that it was not yet available, I'm presuming it was a joke), but there are a few significant differences: The rapidly improving energy density for batteries coupled with much simpler designs and more advanced materials allowing for lighter planes. Add in autonomous operation and the cost picture for operations changes dramatically. This to me is the biggest change: Several of them are now aiming for "Uber in the skies" rather than selling to individuals, which allows for entirely different financial tradeoffs.

At this point there are also multiple flying prototypes, which is a marked difference.

Re: Why you have (probably) already bought your last car

#25

Post by vidarh »

lukev wrote: post #6

So frustrating to me that otherwise smart people keep buying into this narrative, including software developers and tech people who should know better. Here's the actual status quo: after a decade of research into autonomous cars specifically (not to mention the decades of AI and systems research before that), we are barely at the point where a car can function safely with Level 2 autonomy, in good conditions. These…

People are already taking robotic taxis:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/aug/28/driverles...

Admittedly, on a very limited basis. But there is one thing to consider: There are a lot of city cores where average speeds are low enough that such specialised services are viable way of reducing the need for fully flexibly autonomous cars.

E.g. here's an autonomous shuttle manufacturer:

http://www.easymile.com/

These are also in actual use some places (though lagging laws means that many places there's still an attendant), and there are other manufacturers.

So while the full general purpose replacement may take longer than hoped, a lot of more special purpose vehicles like that will nibble away at transport needs, and illustrates that if we look at it as not a problem of replacing cars, but a problem of replacing journeys, it's possible to solve parts of it piecemeal long before we can fully replace cars.

Re: Why you have (probably) already bought your last car

#26

Post by Simulacra »

I hate to say this but.. There will never be autonomous cars. Human psychology, and unpredictability, will doom it all. We can build amazing AI technology, but we will never be able to account for Jenny after six mudslides in a Geo Tracker, or the random decision making of even the most well intention human driver.

Furthermore, if you haven't read "Industrial Society and Its Future"[0] you should. It makes a very good point that society as we know it today cannot and will not support a car-less reality.

[0]. http://editions-hache.com/essais/pdf/kaczynski2.pdf

Re: Why you have (probably) already bought your last car

#27

Post by taneq »

vidarh wrote: post #24
dragonwriter wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there's now half a dozen manufacturers at least that claims to have electric aircraft in this class that are efficient enough to be comparable with electric cars in energy use. You'd have to use a very loose concept of “comparable” for such claims to be plausible, but the personal flying vehicle market has been rife with vaporware draining the wallets of investors and enthusiasts (the latter through early sales of…

> You'd have to use a very loose concept of “comparable” for such claims to be plausible There are actual flying prototypes that have gotten at least within a factor of two of electric cars, depending on respective passenger loads. How they'll come out with production models remains to be seen, and also depends greatly on average passenger counts. People tend to overestimate how much energy flight takes - consider th…

> There are actual flying prototypes that have gotten at least within a factor of two of electric cars

Linky?

> People tend to overestimate how much energy flight takes

But underestimate how much energy convenient VTOL takes.

Re: Why you have (probably) already bought your last car

#28

Post by braindouche »

lukev wrote: post #6

So frustrating to me that otherwise smart people keep buying into this narrative, including software developers and tech people who should know better. Here's the actual status quo: after a decade of research into autonomous cars specifically (not to mention the decades of AI and systems research before that), we are barely at the point where a car can function safely with Level 2 autonomy, in good conditions. These…

"(unless you can manage to turn the road system into a closed system, like rail is)"

I still don't understand why everyone is working so hard trying to make smart cars when it seems like smart roads that control dumb cars would be a simpler, if more expensive, solution. Why not make it a closed system?

Re: Why you have (probably) already bought your last car

#29

Post by runamok »

arentiright wrote: post #15

I believe car leasing will become more popular than buying as automobiles become more technology than machine. Who wants a gadget car with 3 year old technology? People can't even keep phones that long.

There is a less favorable reason you are right. Cars are getting more expensive and people can't afford them even with ever lengthening loan lengths...

Re: Why you have (probably) already bought your last car

#30

Post by kbob »

braindouche wrote: post #28
lukev wrote: post #6

So frustrating to me that otherwise smart people keep buying into this narrative, including software developers and tech people who should know better. Here's the actual status quo: after a decade of research into autonomous cars specifically (not to mention the decades of AI and systems research before that), we are barely at the point where a car can function safely with Level 2 autonomy, in good conditions. These…

"(unless you can manage to turn the road system into a closed system, like rail is)" I still don't understand why everyone is working so hard trying to make smart cars when it seems like smart roads that control dumb cars would be a simpler, if more expensive, solution. Why not make it a closed system?

Because it is open. Things like wildlife, children, drunks, falling trees, snow, ice, flood waters, rock slides, and unsecured cargo can enter the road at any point.
Post reply on HN