171–180 of 218 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can go faster and in a straighter line, and -- given good communication between autonomous vehicles -- there is essentially no limit to traffic throughput. Also, you don't have to build as many roads, which are expensive and take up lots of valuable land.
This is true at least until we become so overpopulated that we're living in Jetson's-style sky-houses.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/chinese-flying-car-maker-gran...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "staff" you mention that does the walk-around of the major commercial airliner is/are also the person(s) who will be piloting the plane, IIRC.
I just flew on an a320 and watched the plane taxi to the gate. Someone on the ground crew in an orange vest walked around the plane and did a visual inspection using a flashlight. At no point did someone from the flight crew leave the plane.
We'll all be happier and healthier and have more money for other stuff if we build our cities around walking, biking, and shared transit. Suburbs = unhealthy, inefficient, unhappy (it has been studied - look it up don't just comment reply "I love the suburbs and my driving my Model X everywhere").
> look it up don't just comment reply "I love the suburbs and my driving my Model X everywhere Instead of this passive aggressive remark, perhaps post links to the research that you believe validates your point? I'm not disagreeing with you, but I bet it's probably possible to find "studies" that back up both sides of the argument.
- Commuting linked to stress, bad health, no friends - Urban low income live longer: http://www.citylab.com/housing/2016/04/when-youre-poor-where... - Commute linked to divorce: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/13/divorce-study_n_375... - Commute linked to poor health: https://www.google.com/search?q=commute+linked+to+poor+healt...
This thread has the potential to become hilariously cringeworthy in a decade or so. I'll be checking back in five years to see if lightweight VTOL aircraft are still an idea that is "obviously stupid because we've tried it before and it didn't work". My guess is that the progress in batteries and electric motors will have made this concept a lot more feasible by then. At some point it will be a completely obvious ide…
No, they do work just fine with Jet-A. Are they practical? No. Will electric battery technology overcome the constraints within 5 years? That's a viable hypothesis, sure.
Jet-A is 46 MJ/kg - Lithium Air ~40MJ/kg - Lithium Ion is 0.85MJ/kg
Lithium Air is the only thing remotely feasible that 'functions' in a laboratory and it has not left the lab since 1970.
"Another recent review on Li-O2 batteries, authored by materials scientists from Technion- Israel Institute of Technology (Balaish, Kraytsberg et al. 2014), concludes with : 'The possibility of buying off the shelf Li–air batteries within 10–20 years does not seem realistic at the moment.'"
It's great seeing a strong push toward aviation as a superior method of transportation. One of the side effects will be people gradual spreading out, away from huge city congestion, which is largely set up due to our transportation. It will enable us to live more in tune with nature, while not giving up the conveniences of having everything we need within short distance. I touched upon this in a blog post: https://me…
What if what we need is frequent in person interaction with other people? Spreading out further and further, eating up arable land with exurban homes, putting more distance between ourselves and others. It seems unhealthy for us and the "nature" you want to be in tune with. "Across the study period, 66 595 youths died by suicide, and rural suicide rates were nearly double those of urban areas for both males (19.93 an…
I don't see how it would be any different from living in suburban area (what many would consider the perfect middle ground between the city and rural areas). Most people for at least 5 minutes to get to where they want to go. Flying (in the future at least) can be no different.
I didn't say that cars are going to disappear anyway. You can still live close to your friends and get to each other via car/bike/golf cart/atv/whatever.
I think you missed my point. The idea is that living the rural life will give you the same experience at a suburban one, and I'd argue, similar to the urban one. Most people still walk 15+ minutes to work in the city. 15 minutes of flying will get you much farther, to a multitude more possible destinations.
It's great seeing a strong push toward aviation as a superior method of transportation. One of the side effects will be people gradual spreading out, away from huge city congestion, which is largely set up due to our transportation. It will enable us to live more in tune with nature, while not giving up the conveniences of having everything we need within short distance. I touched upon this in a blog post: https://me…
I disagree. Most people do not want to live more in tune with nature when it comes to living in it. They have very little interest in immersing themselves in nature outside of an occasional hike or camping trip. That's made exceptionally clear by how people actively choose to live and the things they choose not to do. There is no great pent-up demand for telecommuting, a very small percentage of the working populatio…
I'll agree with you on that one; I hope that will change, esp. when easy flight becomes more available.
> Cities are vastly superior to spreading out, in nearly every possible way. Cities are far more efficient. Cities produce far greater innovation due to concentration of ideas and the knock-on effects; generally speaking you get a multiplier for each person you add to a city.
I disagree. WHAT is it that makes cities currently more efficient? It's proximity to all the things that make it great, which is the innovation. The concentration's utility that you speak of is only proximity. What other purpose does concentration serve? When flight is freely available to all, this will no longer be the case. Any 10-15 minute flight (far less than many city-dwellers' walking/subway commutes) will bring you to pretty much everything a city would offer you, but without the traffic, the noise, and with much more property and privacy. Of course, you will also have easy access to your immediate community around you. It's really the best of both worlds.
Helicopters and small planes already exist. We might have autonomous helicopters and small planes in the future, but flying car concept is flawed and not because it's hard to build one. - Preflight checks and flight safety. Larry should first build normal small aircraft that can do without constant manual checks before flight. This is actually good subgoal to work with even without flying cars in mind. Reliable infra…
You forgot the big one: Most small aircraft cannot fly in bad weather. If it's raining, windy, or even cloudy these things are going to be grounded if the pilot doesn't have an instrument rating.
What problems do flying cars solve? I know it looks cool but is there some huge thing that would get solved with this?
Cars and trucks are relegated to the 2d grid of streets. They consume an inordinate amount of space, and require that all travel occur in series down a road. When an accident occurs, this disrupts the flow of traffic down that path, and also frequently disrupts the flow of surrounding roads as drivers seek alternate routes around the problem. Roads wear down over time, and require maintenance to repair. Salt and chem…