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

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#51

Post by daveguy » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 2:01 PM UTC

adwf wrote: post #22

rtpg wrote: post #15

What problems do flying cars solve? I know it looks cool but is there some huge thing that would get solved with this?

There are a number of potential issues they solve: 1) Efficiency. A flying car can theoretically take a straight line to its destination instead of having to follow a complex road layout. It might be less efficient to fly per minute, but if you're flying less minutes, it could be a net gain. 2) Reduce congestion. How much fuel in a car is burnt in traffic? With flying cars, congestion will largely be a thing of the p…

> 1) Efficiency.

I expect it will always be more efficient to roll an object on wheels than to keep an object lifted under power and moving forward at the same time. Rolling friction is not very high. This and safety are major reasons we don't have flying cars today. Prop planes are in the sub 20 mpg range and jets are in the gallons per mile.

>2) Reduce congestion

I think that autonomous cars (on the ground) will solve this a lot faster than flying cars.

> 3) Reduce urban sprawl.

This is just incorrect. The roads are not what causes urban sprawl and the roads are not the only negative impact. Urban sprawl happened for two reasons: "white flight" and easy transportation. This does nothing for one and makes the other easier.

> 4) Reduce national infrastructure costs.

This would be a very long term benefit after ubiquity of flying cars:cars as cars:trains now. I don't think it will ever get there because of point 1). Personal flight consumes more energy than personal rolling.

>5) convenience.

True. Although houses would have to have heli landing pads installed making it more of a rich toy item. Not to mention noise. Also, autonomous rolling vehicles will solve this too. Is going to your roof more convenient than going to your driveway?

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#52

Post by adwf » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 2:07 PM UTC

dekhn wrote: post #41

adwf wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a number of potential issues they solve: 1) Efficiency. A flying car can theoretically take a straight line to its destination instead of having to follow a complex road layout. It might be less efficient to fly per minute, but if you're flying less minutes, it could be a net gain. 2) Reduce congestion. How much fuel in a car is burnt in traffic? With flying cars, congestion will largely be a thing of the p…

The efficiency argument doesn't work: moving up against gravity will always be more expensive.

Not necessarily. If a car is twice as efficient, but has to travel three times as far because of the windy road system, the flying car will have it beat in a straight line.

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#53

Post by daveguy » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 2:09 PM UTC

ForgotMyUName wrote: post #10

amelius wrote: post #4

By the way, their job openings are all for B.S. and M.S. level (no Ph.D.), which seems a bit odd.

Maybe they need people who do work every day, not just think, talk, or write about doing work.

Ouch.

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#54

Post by adwf » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 2:17 PM UTC

daveguy wrote: post #51

adwf wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a number of potential issues they solve: 1) Efficiency. A flying car can theoretically take a straight line to its destination instead of having to follow a complex road layout. It might be less efficient to fly per minute, but if you're flying less minutes, it could be a net gain. 2) Reduce congestion. How much fuel in a car is burnt in traffic? With flying cars, congestion will largely be a thing of the p…

> 1) Efficiency. I expect it will always be more efficient to roll an object on wheels than to keep an object lifted under power and moving forward at the same time. Rolling friction is not very high. This and safety are major reasons we don't have flying cars today. Prop planes are in the sub 20 mpg range and jets are in the gallons per mile. >2) Reduce congestion I think that autonomous cars (on the ground) will so…

You have to take into account more than just the pure physical efficiency of rolling cars vs. flying. There is the practical efficiency too.

When I drive my car to work, I have to take a big dogleg out to the motorway, sit in traffic for 5 minutes to join, then drive down the motorway which is winding between the towns but mostly going the right direction, then take another big dogleg off + traffic, and finally I'm at my destination. I wouldn't be surprised if I'd driven the equivalent of 2-3 times the straight line distance.

Normal efficiency calcs focus on the gallons part, a flying car would reduce the miles.

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#55

Post by uptown » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 2:17 PM UTC

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #46

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…

This doesn't solve the parking problem. Sure, you get to work a bit faster but now you need to put that thing down. In a downtown area where there's a major price premium for parking. Getting to work in 10 minutes instead of 30 is going to be attractive and that'll raise parking demand, but there's only going to be so much parking available. Tearing down profitable office buildings to make flying car parking lots wil…

"Tearing down profitable office buildings to make flying car parking lots will be cost prohibitive and I doubt Joe Officeworker is interested in a $500 a month flying car space."

Rooftops have been used for ages as landing pads for helicopters. I don't see why you couldn't do the same for these. And the article mentions adoption of the uber-model of non-ownership, so it's not like you'd need a parking lot of these sitting idly at the workplace for end-of-day. They'd come and go on-demand.

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#56

Post by drzaiusapelord » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 2:18 PM UTC

uptown wrote: post #55

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't solve the parking problem. Sure, you get to work a bit faster but now you need to put that thing down. In a downtown area where there's a major price premium for parking. Getting to work in 10 minutes instead of 30 is going to be attractive and that'll raise parking demand, but there's only going to be so much parking available. Tearing down profitable office buildings to make flying car parking lots wil…

"Tearing down profitable office buildings to make flying car parking lots will be cost prohibitive and I doubt Joe Officeworker is interested in a $500 a month flying car space." Rooftops have been used for ages as landing pads for helicopters. I don't see why you couldn't do the same for these. And the article mentions adoption of the uber-model of non-ownership, so it's not like you'd need a parking lot of these si…

My rooftop is full of HVAC equipment and my building is 28 stories high. Even if it was engineered to hold that much weight and redone to make it safe for landing a vtol plane, we're looking at what? 3 or 4 spaces at most in a building that holds over 2,000 people.

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#57

Post by nibs » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 2:21 PM UTC

mashlol wrote: post #37

mawburn wrote: post #26

>We noticed that you're using an ad blocker, which may adversely affect the performance and content on Bloomberg.com. For the best experience, please whitelist the site. Yeah, ok Bloomberg.

I'm on mobile, not using an ad blocker, and I still got this message... really Bloomberg...? Also by performance being affected perhaps they are referring to the 5 extra secondtheys make you wait.

My AdBlocker must have blocked that because I never saw it either.

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#58

Post by jackhack » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 2:22 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…

>>In the meantime try to get new helicopter landing sites approved in your neighborhood.

Which takes us right back to the noise issue which needs to be solved, first. 'Till then, no way.

Helicopters (nicknamed 'choppers' for good reason) buzzing over neighborhoods aren't exactly the average homeowner's dream. The "whapwhapwhapwhap" of a helicopter overhead, reverberating through a home, is just as desirable as open-pipe Harley Davidson motorbikes or roaring hotrods. That is to say, it's not.

Other than a crash, I can't think of a surer way to put people off from air traffic than noise.

(edit: grammatical typo: than->as)

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#59

Post by jp555 » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 2:23 PM UTC

Nokinside wrote: post #33

sievebrain wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your first point makes sense, but if the flying cars are fully electric then I'm not sure how much of the work to make existing small aircraft totally reliable would be applicable to such a different machine. I guess that leads on to the question of, why not start by making an electric self-maintaining self-flying Cessna?

Energy density of jet fuel and gasoline is something like 45-46 MJ/kg. All rechargeable lithium-whatever batteries have less than MJ/kg. Turboprops are efficient and reliable. They have good power-to-weight ratio. Currently electric motors are good only for things like gliders that need relatively little power.

If self-flying taxi average flight times are 15 min, does this matter?

Re: Larry Page’s startups working on flying cars

#60

Post by joosters » Thu, Jun 09, 2016, 2:23 PM UTC

uptown wrote: post #55

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't solve the parking problem. Sure, you get to work a bit faster but now you need to put that thing down. In a downtown area where there's a major price premium for parking. Getting to work in 10 minutes instead of 30 is going to be attractive and that'll raise parking demand, but there's only going to be so much parking available. Tearing down profitable office buildings to make flying car parking lots wil…

"Tearing down profitable office buildings to make flying car parking lots will be cost prohibitive and I doubt Joe Officeworker is interested in a $500 a month flying car space." Rooftops have been used for ages as landing pads for helicopters. I don't see why you couldn't do the same for these. And the article mentions adoption of the uber-model of non-ownership, so it's not like you'd need a parking lot of these si…

A helicopter pad on a rooftop can generally only hold one helicopter. Where would the other people in the office park? Besides, hardly any of these flying car designs take off & land vertically.