Jetson One – Personal Electric Aerial Vehicle • Hacker News Board

Re: Jetson One – Personal Electric Aerial Vehicle

#41

Post by kumarvvr » Mon, Oct 25, 2021, 2:02 AM UTC

ctvo wrote: post #31

kumarvvr wrote: post #24

We have gained so much in terms of technological progress, consistently reducing the energy required to go from point A to point B, it surprises me how we are again increasing it for getting from point A to point B. The concept is great, but the push for mass market adoption bugs me. These things are not efficient modes of transport. It takes a lot of energy to move one person from A to B.

> The concept is great, but the push for mass market adoption bugs me. > These things are not efficient modes of transport. It takes a lot of energy to move one person from A to B. Will you not entertain the possibility that a form of travel using geodesic distance may be more efficient? Going from Brooklyn to Manhattan and bypassing traffic, for example (a small body of water where flying across would be more effici…

> Will you not entertain the possibility that a form of travel using geodesic distance may be more efficient?

I completely agree. But for mass market personal aerial vehicles, regulation would eventually force vehicles to fly close to ground (for safety of self and others, better fall 30 feet than 300 feet)

In this scenario, geodesic distance hardly makes any difference.

Personal aerial vehicles are never going to be safe. Not for the lack of innovation or technology, but for human nature. Ever see how many people drive their cars with the "check engine" lights on? Or how many fail to get theirs serviced in time, or change the oil in time? The mass market is not fit to drive their own personal aerial vehicles.

There are niche uses, such as medical emergencies, policing, etc. Putting these into the hands of everyone is a disaster waiting to happen.

Re: Jetson One – Personal Electric Aerial Vehicle

#42

Post by dragonwriter » Mon, Oct 25, 2021, 2:03 AM UTC

notatoad wrote: post #29

> Start and Land anywhere you want. Make your garden or terrace your private airport I assume this is wildly illegal in most jurisdictions?

In the US, you can fly most places and land most places (with permission of the owner) with helicopters, with only general (e.g., must pose no hazard to people and property) rules instead of specific restrictions (outside of controls to keep them out of, e.g., airplane traffic patterns around airports.)

But I can see something like this being available in numbers being the catalyst for that changing fast...

Re: Jetson One – Personal Electric Aerial Vehicle

#43

Post by anonporridge » Mon, Oct 25, 2021, 2:04 AM UTC

noduerme wrote: post #30

kumarvvr wrote: post #24

We have gained so much in terms of technological progress, consistently reducing the energy required to go from point A to point B, it surprises me how we are again increasing it for getting from point A to point B. The concept is great, but the push for mass market adoption bugs me. These things are not efficient modes of transport. It takes a lot of energy to move one person from A to B.

I agree. No one ever said waverunners were a practical form of transportation, but they still sell millions of them. This does look like a really fun personal toy, though. I can easy imagine some rich dudes taking them for Endor-style races through the forest up here.

Like a powered paraglider on steroids.

Re: Jetson One – Personal Electric Aerial Vehicle

#44

Post by leetcrew » Mon, Oct 25, 2021, 2:05 AM UTC

tshaddox wrote: post #35

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #12

Almost looks like a ground-effect vehicle. Doesn’t go too high; which may not really be an issue. Just high enough, so tarmac isn’t necessary. I seem to recall a discussion on HN, where it was explained that quadcopters don’t scale up too well. I don’t remember the reasoning. The one thing that concerns me about commodity-level flying vehicles, is the way people drive the ones that are stuck on the ground. I would wa…

I’m not sure what reasons there would be for quadcopters not scaling up well. Bigger rotors should be more efficient like with any other aircraft. Perhaps there are scaling issues with quickly changing the speed of larger rotors to maintain flight control? That could be resolved by using variable-pitch rotors, although at that point you’ve lost the key advantage of multirotors (which is their mechanical simplicity) a…

helicopters also have one major advantage for manned applications: autorotation. there's at least a chance to survive loss of power in a helicopter. a quad with no power just falls.

Re: Jetson One – Personal Electric Aerial Vehicle

#45

Post by dtgriscom » Mon, Oct 25, 2021, 2:06 AM UTC

sydthrowaway wrote: post #21

20 minute flight time? Useless.

Top speed of 60MPH; let's halve that for a safety margin, which gives a range of ten miles. There's around thirty towns and cities that close to my home. Reaching any of thirty towns in ten minutes would be far from useless.

Re: Jetson One – Personal Electric Aerial Vehicle

#46

Post by tweedledee » Mon, Oct 25, 2021, 2:08 AM UTC

noduerme wrote: post #30

kumarvvr wrote: post #24

We have gained so much in terms of technological progress, consistently reducing the energy required to go from point A to point B, it surprises me how we are again increasing it for getting from point A to point B. The concept is great, but the push for mass market adoption bugs me. These things are not efficient modes of transport. It takes a lot of energy to move one person from A to B.

I agree. No one ever said waverunners were a practical form of transportation, but they still sell millions of them. This does look like a really fun personal toy, though. I can easy imagine some rich dudes taking them for Endor-style races through the forest up here.

That would involve Endor-style crashes, it would be insanely dangerous. Flying FPV drones gives much of the same feeling without the all the death.

Re: Jetson One – Personal Electric Aerial Vehicle

#47

Post by runlevel1 » Mon, Oct 25, 2021, 2:08 AM UTC

ricardobeat wrote: post #19

Isn’t it crazy that Moller spent decades trying to get the basics of their flying car, only to give up inches from the finish line? Tech has evolved so fast in the past few years that a brand new vehicle like this can go from design to production in a few years, and anyone can build a rough working prototype in their backyard.

The liquid fuels Moller used had much better energy densities than batteries, but it never flew without a tether. The Jetson One claims to have 20 minutes endurance, which is very impressive, but still impractical.

I'm not so sure the finish line is within sight yet. This is closer to an ATV than it is to a scooter. It even looks a bit like a Honda Pilot ATV with propellors.

It could attract more folks than a traditional ultralight would. The price tag is much higher, though.

Re: Jetson One – Personal Electric Aerial Vehicle

#48

Post by anonporridge » Mon, Oct 25, 2021, 2:10 AM UTC

tweedledee wrote: post #46

noduerme wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. No one ever said waverunners were a practical form of transportation, but they still sell millions of them. This does look like a really fun personal toy, though. I can easy imagine some rich dudes taking them for Endor-style races through the forest up here.

That would involve Endor-style crashes, it would be insanely dangerous. Flying FPV drones gives much of the same feeling without the all the death.

You can also take gondolas to the top of mountains, but people still climb them, putting themselves in unnecessary risk of death for the same views.

There will always be some subset of people willing to do crazy dangerous things when similar safe alternates exist.

And I for one am excited to see the race footage.

Re: Jetson One – Personal Electric Aerial Vehicle

#49

Post by antisthenes » Mon, Oct 25, 2021, 2:14 AM UTC

kumarvvr wrote: post #24

We have gained so much in terms of technological progress, consistently reducing the energy required to go from point A to point B, it surprises me how we are again increasing it for getting from point A to point B. The concept is great, but the push for mass market adoption bugs me. These things are not efficient modes of transport. It takes a lot of energy to move one person from A to B.

> We have gained so much in terms of technological progress, consistently reducing the energy required to go from point A to point B, it surprises me how we are again increasing it for getting from point A to point B.

It takes exactly the same amount of energy to go from point A to point B as it did 10,000 years ago.

What we've done is gotten better at packing more energy generation in a smaller volume/envelope.

Re: Jetson One – Personal Electric Aerial Vehicle

#50

Post by tweedledee » Mon, Oct 25, 2021, 2:16 AM UTC

anonporridge wrote: post #48

tweedledee wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would involve Endor-style crashes, it would be insanely dangerous. Flying FPV drones gives much of the same feeling without the all the death.

You can also take gondolas to the top of mountains, but people still climb them, putting themselves in unnecessary risk of death for the same views. There will always be some subset of people willing to do crazy dangerous things when similar safe alternates exist. And I for one am excited to see the race footage.

I've flown FPV drones through forests, it's insane. The reaction speeds needed are crazy. It is almost impossible to last a day without crashing. I'm sure there are lots of fun things to do with it, but Endor style races is not one of them. The people willing to do things that crazy don't last very long.