Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars • Hacker News Board

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#181

Post by stcredzero » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 9:49 PM UTC

Nokinside wrote: post #21

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…

No matter how energy efficient the engines are, hovering and short takeoffs use lots of energy.

What about electric vehicles with beamed power? The "heavy lifting" for a small electric aircraft could be done at the airport using beamed power, freeing up weight and increasing the effective range of the aircraft.

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#182

Post by TeMPOraL » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 9:54 PM UTC

skj wrote: post #166

alphapapa wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what happens when a Cessna parachutes onto the roof of your house? Onto the middle of a busy street? etc. If we were all using flying cars, this would become a regular occurrence. It's just not practical at that scale.

What happens when a car veers off the road into your living room?

Probably much less damage, because a typical car in the city is going much slower than a typical plane falling from the sky, and kinetic energy goes with square of velocity...

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#183

Post by TeMPOraL » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 9:55 PM UTC

stcredzero wrote: post #181

Nokinside wrote: post #21

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…

No matter how energy efficient the engines are, hovering and short takeoffs use lots of energy. What about electric vehicles with beamed power? The "heavy lifting" for a small electric aircraft could be done at the airport using beamed power, freeing up weight and increasing the effective range of the aircraft.

The question is, how much power would be needed. It screams "military-grade futuristic microwave weapon" to me.

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#184

Post by PhasmaFelis » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 9:56 PM UTC

skj wrote: post #166

alphapapa wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what happens when a Cessna parachutes onto the roof of your house? Onto the middle of a busy street? etc. If we were all using flying cars, this would become a regular occurrence. It's just not practical at that scale.

What happens when a car veers off the road into your living room?

The basic design of roads and their surroundings mean that an out-of-control car is relatively unlikely to collide with a building, as opposed to another car, a utility pole, a divider/barrier, etc. Conversely, an aircraft falling over a built-up area is very likely to encounter a building, and even if it lands in a road, it's going to be harder for moving cars to spot and avoid than an out-of-control car would be.

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#185

Post by aurizon » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 10:07 PM UTC

I remember the pulp Science Fiction magazines of the 30's, 40's and 50's. Quite often they had drawn pictures of cities with hundreds of planes going every which way. For a while it was autogyros, helicopters etc. It never happened. Cars won. A car is supported by the road with zero energy cost except for motion. Any aircraft must waste energy at all times, and the highest energy use is when standing still(hovering). Ok so they have 100,000 planes flying around LA at 200 miles per hour. Managing that number of planes under automatic computer control is a huge technical challenge. Human pilots = impossible.

Until we have anti g and can hover for zero energy it will never happen.

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#186

Post by rorosaurus » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 10:13 PM UTC

jeiting wrote: post #129

cpncrunch wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With modern FADEC engines, all of this is automated (from what I read...I've never actually flown anything with FADEC).

The recent diesel installs with FADEC that Redbird has been doing in 172s have a one button run up: You just hold the breaks and hit a button and the FADEC does the run up and checks all parameters and gives you a go/no-go. FADEC - Full Authority Digital Engine Control

Very interesting. Do you know how this system handles eventual sensor failure?

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#187

Post by techthroway443 » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 10:13 PM UTC

JDDunn9 wrote: post #79

I just emailed the people at Moller this week asking them what the biggest challenge in making a flying car was. Their reply was: Thanks for reaching out to Moller International. Your question is a good one, with a multitude of answers. For now, I’ll explain 3 of the biggest factors. First, there is a lot of FAA and government regulations regarding aircraft. Airworthiness certification is a lengthy process, and depen…

So they biggest obstacle is regulation/money and not in the technical challenges of making a 3,500 pound rectangle zip around the air? Ok.

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#188

Post by uptown » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 10:15 PM UTC

skrause wrote: post #180

uptown wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Bicycles also solve all the problems you listed.

Bicycles are a great alternative for many commuters but they can't match the range that cars or planes can provide for most cyclists.

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#189

Post by shalmanese » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 10:37 PM UTC

6stringmerc wrote: post #125

NegativeK wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're associating "car" with "something a homeowner can regularly control." I associate "car" more with "a personal vehicle." I'd rather high speed chunks of metal not be under individual control, personally. Road or air.

That's fine, you can use whatever inaccurate terms you'd like but I won't share that approach. Personally, having grown up in an aviation family and being a studied gear-head, I simply don't share your confidence that individual control is inferior to automation at the root. In fact, I think until AI is comparable to the human brain, arguing that automation and programming is better is wrong; moreover it's unsuitable…

I too believe that only a live, thinking animal beneath my flanks possess the sufficient intelligence to navigate the potholed streets of our fair city and that those trusting in cold hard iron are bound for a fool's errand. I am certain that this "automobile" is a fad that will in due time run it's course and that we will all be back to the trusty steed by decade's end.

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#190

Post by johngalt » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 10:43 PM UTC

I've always thought a flying motorcycle makes more sense than a flying car. The power to weight ratios are closer, as are the engine requirements. Something like a long two seater cabin motorcycle with wings that attach like glider wings. Something like this with wings:

https://peraves.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/roger_susan_mono...

Flys like a motorglider. I.e. slow for a plane but faster than a car/bike. Very efficient per mile (for a plane). Tolerates engine failure with a good glide ratio.

Ground to air transitions happen at designated places (mini airports). Wings are left at the airport while you operate the bike in ground mode. Or towed in a narrow trailer just like a glider trailer.