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

Toyota invests $394m in Joby Aviation's flying taxis

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 89 posts

Re: Toyota invests $394m in Joby Aviation's flying taxis

#51

Post by ta1234567890 »

seoulmetro wrote: post #44
malandrew wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd be surprised how far 469 heliports go. That's one more than the number of stations the NY Metro has, which is the metro with the most number of stations in the world. Now imagine you could travel as the crow flies between any station in NYC. That's awesome efficiency, and if you still need you can grab an Uber at street level if you're still not close enough. You're also not limited to just those 469 heliports.…

No. Seoul Metro has nearly double that of NYC. I have no idea how you could possibly think NYC has the most in the world. Just think of most Chinese cities, let alone Korea's capital. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seoul_Metropolitan_Subway

Also Tokyo, Japan. It's ranked first in the world on subway usage and has 882 railway stations. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_subway

Re: Toyota invests $394m in Joby Aviation's flying taxis

#52

Post by nomel »

squeakynick wrote: post #38
the_duke wrote: post #2

There are a lot of companies working on "flying taxis". All of those seem to have a large footprint with lots of rotors, meaning they will need dedicated landing/take off zones. This seems to limit their usability a lot, turning them more into a short range point to point helicopter service. Not to mention the noise pollution. Those things are all loud. Combine that with limited speed and range, and I just don't see…

Half of these designs are simply scaled up drones which, according to simple physics and engineering, is the wrong direction. Details: http://datagenetics.com/blog/february62019/index.html How can organisations this large get it so wrong? When is someone going to tell them that the Emperor is not wearing any clothes?

I think multi-rotor is a great safety feature, especially if they're partitioned into separate power systems. It would almost require intention to design something like the Volocopter without the ability to soft land in the case of an emergency.

The link you provided mentions this in an odd way:

> With a single engine helicopter you don’t have this redundancy. However, on engine failure, the single massive disk of the helicopter is an asset. ... Close to the ground, this stored kinetic energy can be traded, through pulling up the cyclic, to allow a safe landing. This is called autorotation, and is practiced by all helicopter pilots.

The air taxi that succeeds, at any sort of scale, will not be meant or designed for skilled helicopter pilots pulling levers, at the right moment, as they speed towards the ground. They will be dumb, cheap to service, unskilled to fly, and have more than one point of failure.

Re: Toyota invests $394m in Joby Aviation's flying taxis

#53

Post by darkteflon »

ianai wrote: post #29
darkteflon wrote: post #26

This is pretty much everything you need to know about Toyota - everything you need to know about corporate Japan - wrapped up neatly in one anecdote. Toyota can’t make a plug-in electric car to save themselves but for white elephants like flying cars and smart cities they are all in.

Uh the Prius Prime and (later this year) RAV4 prime exist or will soon. What’s your point?

You’re making it for me: stuffing a (tiny) battery into a legacy ICE or hybrid architecture and calling it a day isn’t competitive with _current_ competition, let alone where the market is going.

Toyota’s failure to convert its early lead in hybrids into a successful EV business will be quoted in business schools and boardrooms for decades as a textbook cautionary tale.

Re: Toyota invests $394m in Joby Aviation's flying taxis

#55

Post by godelski »

nradov wrote: post #46
godelski wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just an FYI, helicopters can land without engine power by autorotation. I'm assuming these things, if you're putting people in them, would do the same. Additionally, autonomous flight is fairly common right now. There's less going on in the air than on the ground (or rather less surprises with small response time and high consequences). Planes even land and take off by themselves. The first plane to actually be certi…

Those powered lift aircraft don't have enough rotor inertia to perform autorotation. They will have to rely on redundant power systems plus ballistic recovery parachutes. Autonomous flight is still quite rare. And even when it is used, there are still human pilots standing by to take over in case anything goes wrong.

> Autonomous flight is quite common. When it is used, there are still human pilots standing by to take over in case anything goes wrong.

FTFY.

I'm just saying that comparing autonomous flight to autonomous driving isn't fair. Flying is a lot easier for a machine. You already have tons of data streaming in from airports, other planes, and lots of equipment on the vehicle itself.

Re: Toyota invests $394m in Joby Aviation's flying taxis

#56

Post by [deleted] »

malandrew wrote: post #20
mc32 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even so there are only 469 (in 2008 according to the article) in all of São Paulo and that’s the metro area with the most helicopters in the world. I doubt the likes of Hyundai are looking to sell their things “in the hundreds to thousands” range. It’d a a big change in air traffic and noise pollution.

You'd be surprised how far 469 heliports go. That's one more than the number of stations the NY Metro has, which is the metro with the most number of stations in the world. Now imagine you could travel as the crow flies between any station in NYC. That's awesome efficiency, and if you still need you can grab an Uber at street level if you're still not close enough. You're also not limited to just those 469 heliports.…

[deleted]

Re: Toyota invests $394m in Joby Aviation's flying taxis

#57

Post by swarnie_ »

darkteflon wrote: post #26

This is pretty much everything you need to know about Toyota - everything you need to know about corporate Japan - wrapped up neatly in one anecdote. Toyota can’t make a plug-in electric car to save themselves but for white elephants like flying cars and smart cities they are all in.

Every other car in my town seems to be a Prius, are you sure?

Re: Toyota invests $394m in Joby Aviation's flying taxis

#58

Post by jillesvangurp »

the_duke wrote: post #2

There are a lot of companies working on "flying taxis". All of those seem to have a large footprint with lots of rotors, meaning they will need dedicated landing/take off zones. This seems to limit their usability a lot, turning them more into a short range point to point helicopter service. Not to mention the noise pollution. Those things are all loud. Combine that with limited speed and range, and I just don't see…

Rotor size matters a lot for noise and how far it carries. Compared to a helicopter these things are going to be a lot less noisy. Also there's a difference between landing/taking off and cruise. Several of these designs have wings and a vtol configuration. There's no shortage of roof tops, open areas, etc. that could be converted to land on. As soon as viable products hit the market they'll be very popular. Finally, cities are noisy places and it will be hard to hear them over the background noise.

The reason this will take off (physically and economically) is cost. If you can travel 40-50m quickly for about the energy cost of a cup of coffee, it's going to be a game changer in big cities. I can take an Uber across town in Berlin but it will cost me around 20-30 euros and take 50 minutes (worse in rush hour) and is not that competitive with public transport. The same journey with a flying taxi could be done in 5-10 minutes (just like with a helicopter) the difference will be vastly lower cost. The main cost will be the pilot who can now do multiple journeys per hour and at least short term still charge a premium.

Post reply on HN