Wheres my flying car?

If the discharge of hydrogen from a fuel cell car isn't considered a problem, why would it be a problem for a plane?
Who says it isn't a problem? It may be a LOW-RISK problem, but just dismissing any risk out of hand is stupid.

Besides, cars are subjected to limited forces, in case you have some kind of loss-of-lift failure in a flying car and fall from several hundred meters you're going to get pulverized on impact. There won't be a controlled release of hydrogen, an explosion, or at least major fireball a la Hindenburg is nigh-impossible to avoid.

Thats why man invented autopilot! No need to worry about drunk flying if the pilots a computer who doesn't drink!
And you assume everybody would use these autopilots, at all times, or that said autopilot will always be functioning properly?

Most people would not be interested in autopiloted cars, as they prefer to be in control themselves (even though your typical driver probably isn't particulary skilled).

Besides as mentioned by Buddha, the noise issues alone is enough to kill flying cars as a concept dead outright... Car engines + rubber wheels on asphalt make enough of a racket as it is.
 
You could propel the thousands of car-train things with a mag-lev system
now I know nothing about this but im sure magnets influence abates at > the square of the distance or something, thus flying by magnets is a no go for cheap (or even remotely possible) solution

as I said in my first post a flying car is just far too unsafe for mass use, OTOH one of those backpack that u strap to your back, hmmmm :)
 
Contrary to what most people think, the 'cars' are there. The bottleneck, by far, is regulating their use safely (as SB discussed earlier)
 
Besides as mentioned by Buddha, the noise issues alone is enough to kill flying cars as a concept dead outright... Car engines + rubber wheels on asphalt make enough of a racket as it is.

Just to be fair it was hoom that brought up the very valid point of noise pollution (another reason Airports are generally miles away from a population center if possible).

I was dealing more with safety and logistics issues.

But yes, noise is a very valid concern as there are no systems of "quiet" flight, other than gliding, ballooning...or back to my original comment, Blimps for all. :D

Even ultra lights are fairly noisey beasts. Muffler systems to help deal with the noise would add far too much weight.

And that doesn't even get into fuel requirements.

Heck you get into similar issues when you start talking about, "Where are all the Hovercraft?" :D

Regards,
SB
 
Last edited by a moderator:
now I know nothing about this but im sure magnets influence abates at > the square of the distance or something, thus flying by magnets is a no go for cheap (or even remotely possible) solution

as I said in my first post a flying car is just far too unsafe for mass use, OTOH one of those backpack that u strap to your back, hmmmm :)
No I'm saying that you could hover around. Having decks of rails stacked on top of each other would allow you to split traffic three dimensionally.

I think it's the only realistic way of having vertical traffic lanes within city limits.
 
Heck you get into similar issues when you start talking about, "Where are all the Hovercraft?" :D

Regards,
SB

Yeah?! Well wheres my hovercraft huh?! :p

Tell me where it is!

In any case surely with a combination of a partnership between a city/nation and various corportations we could move towards a more efficient, no/few fatality/injury form of transportation which gets people where they want to go which beats the cost/performance of a traditional road network without stuffing everyone into pubic transportation, spelling intended.

In any case I was thinking that perhaps the next step would be to upgrade all of the low mileage, high use vehicles like cabs to electric. I don't think the typical cab travels more than the range of a good EV (100) miles every day and could be recharged whenever/whereever as cabs frequently have a lot of down time and yet they constitute a disproportionate quantity of miles traveled within a city.

Perhaps beyond that we could move to the Total recall style 'Johny Cab' where the cab drives itself. Sure it doesn't make sense for a personal vehicle but if you consider the typical cab has two people working and a typical wages of over 40-50k a year in USD at least that could amortise over 5 years easily even if the cab itself cost 150k or more.
 
In any case surely with a combination of a partnership between a city/nation and various corportations we could move towards a more efficient, no/few fatality/injury form of transportation which gets people where they want to go which beats the cost/performance of a traditional road network without stuffing everyone into pubic transportation, spelling intended.

Unfortunately that's at odds with people wanting to go anywhere they want, whenever they want. Remember, roads also serve a vital role in preserving nature despite how much of nature is uprooted for roads. Odd to think of it that way, but true. Roads, keep heavy traffic to well defined areas. Imagine what would happen if anyone could take a motor vehicle anywhere they wanted at anytime.

In any case I was thinking that perhaps the next step would be to upgrade all of the low mileage, high use vehicles like cabs to electric. I don't think the typical cab travels more than the range of a good EV (100) miles every day and could be recharged whenever/whereever as cabs frequently have a lot of down time and yet they constitute a disproportionate quantity of miles traveled within a city.

Already happening in a lot of major metropolitan areas that can afford it. For smaller population centers, I'm not sure the investment in EVs is a very good proposition at the moment. Consider that many cab companies rely on heavily discounted cars and the cost is recouped over a period of years. Less time for heavily congested cities. Far far longer for less congested cities.

Perhaps beyond that we could move to the Total recall style 'Johny Cab' where the cab drives itself. Sure it doesn't make sense for a personal vehicle but if you consider the typical cab has two people working and a typical wages of over 40-50k a year in USD at least that could amortise over 5 years easily even if the cab itself cost 150k or more.

No thanks. Cabbies don't earn wages in quite the way you think. A friend and I worked for one for a while. This may not apply to all areas, but where I worked, a cabby was a state licensed contractor. You rented a car for a day (was 100 USD a day where we were), and got to keep whatever you made in fare and tips.

How much you can make depends greatly on how busy your area is, what time of day it is, how many cabbies are working at the same time you are, yadda yadda yadda.

Basically if you aren't in a big city, you might make 40k a year...working overtime, or if you guess right most of the time about which city quadrant to be in at what time. But it's also quite easy to make 20k or less. And some non-self motivated people will actually end up losing money. :oops: No surprise, they didn't keep at it long. :)

And if you got into a fender bender. Even if it isn't your fault, you could end up on the "black list" for renting a cab.

Anyway, that was a bit of a long sidetrack, eh? First I don't think people would entire trust an automated cab (I know I wouldn't). After all it's not uncommon for a GPS device to give you the wrong directions to get somewhere. :p And again, a good autopilot system with good anticollision systems, that can stay on the road and obey all traffic signs, lights, etc is going to be exhorbitantly expensive.

Some car companies (Toyota for example) spend millions each year on just anti-collision and stay on the road tech research. They've been doing it for a lot of years now and it still isn't ready for primetime. And that doesn't even get into traffic lights, traffic signs, construction changes, navigation, etc...

Afraid we're quite a ways from Minority Report style cars or Total Recall style cabs. :)

Regards,
SB
 
Why, anti collision has been in series Mercedes for a year or two already (current E- and S-class) and "stay on the road" or rather "stay in the lane" system has been available for about 4-5 years in series Citroen models and more recently some others too. Even automatic parking system is available from VW nowadays.
 
Unfortunately that's at odds with people wanting to go anywhere they want, whenever they want. Remember, roads also serve a vital role in preserving nature despite how much of nature is uprooted for roads. Odd to think of it that way, but true. Roads, keep heavy traffic to well defined areas. Imagine what would happen if anyone could take a motor vehicle anywhere they wanted at anytime.

I am talking about personalised transportation. Not Buddha buses! :p Im just thinking that perhaps for example instead of roads having a raised monorail for each direction with a reduced physical footprint on the ground, especially in congested cities where you could have a higher density transportation. It could be cheaper from the perspective of both land and energy use whilst still getting people to where they want to go. By segregating the road and foot traffic and going for completely computer controlled transportation people would be freed from driving their own cars.

For instance, if you were designing a city for the 21st century, would you build a typical roading network?

Already happening in a lot of major metropolitan areas that can afford it. For smaller population centers, I'm not sure the investment in EVs is a very good proposition at the moment. Consider that many cab companies rely on heavily discounted cars and the cost is recouped over a period of years. Less time for heavily congested cities. Far far longer for less congested cities.

Where im from most cab drivers either own their own car or share their car with another driver. The reason for the EV angle is that its a much better investment for one cab which typically does 50,000kms a year in driving to be subsidised for electric than it is for a typical commuter who may do only 1/5th as much driving. Also as professional drivers, the drawbacks of having EVs can be downplayed somewhat.

No thanks. Cabbies don't earn wages in quite the way you think. A friend and I worked for one for a while. This may not apply to all areas, but where I worked, a cabby was a state licensed contractor. You rented a car for a day (was 100 USD a day where we were), and got to keep whatever you made in fare and tips.

How much you can make depends greatly on how busy your area is, what time of day it is, how many cabbies are working at the same time you are, yadda yadda yadda.

Basically if you aren't in a big city, you might make 40k a year...working overtime, or if you guess right most of the time about which city quadrant to be in at what time. But it's also quite easy to make 20k or less. And some non-self motivated people will actually end up losing money. No surprise, they didn't keep at it long. :)

And if you got into a fender bender. Even if it isn't your fault, you could end up on the "black list" for renting a cab.

Such a U.S. centric POV. :p

Anyway, that was a bit of a long sidetrack, eh? First I don't think people would entire trust an automated cab (I know I wouldn't). After all it's not uncommon for a GPS device to give you the wrong directions to get somewhere. :p And again, a good autopilot system with good anticollision systems, that can stay on the road and obey all traffic signs, lights, etc is going to be exhorbitantly expensive.

Some car companies (Toyota for example) spend millions each year on just anti-collision and stay on the road tech research. They've been doing it for a lot of years now and it still isn't ready for primetime. And that doesn't even get into traffic lights, traffic signs, construction changes, navigation, etc...

Afraid we're quite a ways from Minority Report style cars or Total Recall style cabs. :)

Regards,
SB

Expensive has a habit of becoming affordable! However consider how many lives which could have been saved and the damage prevented if you took away the responsibility of driving the car and gave it to a computer (obviously one that does a good job!)

See, the technology of actually driving a car via computer is more than doable. The issue is not hitting anything! :D

 
That Clarkson whatsisface's developed a bit of a paunch over the years hasn't he! For shame...! :LOL:
 
Well, he is 50-odd, and spends most of his job sitting around on his arse. Not too surprising he's put a bit of weight on, though it doesn't explain why he has become even more of a caricature of himself as the years have advanced... ;)
 
Why, anti collision has been in series Mercedes for a year or two already (current E- and S-class) and "stay on the road" or rather "stay in the lane" system has been available for about 4-5 years in series Citroen models and more recently some others too. Even automatic parking system is available from VW nowadays.

So it can stay in the lane even in the event of an emergency situation on a icey road? Anticollision while staying on the road.

Or avoid a car that swerves into the lane from another lane too soon? Same situation.

So it can go a few hundred miles at 60+ MPH (100+ KPH) on a freeway basically with the driver watching a movie while reclined in his seat? Stay in lane and anticollision with cruise control. After all there should be Zero need for driver intervention in this case.

Regards,
SB
 
I am talking about personalised transportation. Not Buddha buses! :p Im just thinking that perhaps for example instead of roads having a raised monorail for each direction with a reduced physical footprint on the ground, especially in congested cities where you could have a higher density transportation. It could be cheaper from the perspective of both land and energy use whilst still getting people to where they want to go. By segregating the road and foot traffic and going for completely computer controlled transportation people would be freed from driving their own cars.

For instance, if you were designing a city for the 21st century, would you build a typical roading network?

But that goes right back to my point. People wanting to go where they want, when they want. Any vehicle that (yes US centric) can't go anywhere within say 2k miles at a moments notice will fail to catch on as personal transportation.

It may have a niche with people who never ever leave a city, but that's going to be a rather high priced niche.

Expensive has a habit of becoming affordable! However consider how many lives which could have been saved and the damage prevented if you took away the responsibility of driving the car and gave it to a computer (obviously one that does a good job!)

Mandatory random road blocks with breathalizer tests can also save many lives (worked in Japan). Unfortunately it's against the law in most of the US (yes I know again US centric. :)). I'd rather see more affordable ways of saving lives. Then again, I wouldn't mind if the government just stopped messing around trying to be everyone's Nanny and let people have personal responsibility. :p

See, the technology of actually driving a car via computer is more than doable. The issue is not hitting anything! :D

Grin...

Regards,
SB
 
So it can stay in the lane even in the event of an emergency situation on a icey road? Anticollision while staying on the road.

Or avoid a car that swerves into the lane from another lane too soon? Same situation.

So it can go a few hundred miles at 60+ MPH (100+ KPH) on a freeway basically with the driver watching a movie while reclined in his seat? Stay in lane and anticollision with cruise control. After all there should be Zero need for driver intervention in this case.

Regards,
SB

Of course it's far from perfect, but it is already available in series cars, that was my point.
 
Yes, I never said there weren't rudimentary versions of this in some cars, Lexus, Mercedes, etc. But millions are still being invested in R&D because it isn't very good at the moment. Very good meaning no human intervention required in a variety of situations.

That isn't to discount the progress that has been made over the past decade+, but with regards to this thread topic and follow on questions about autonomous cars, it has to be perfect or as close to perfect as to be almost indistinguishable.

Regards,
SB
 
Well that would be nice, but there are many huge hurdles till that is achieved. You'd basically need a car that is more intelligent (reacting faster) than a human and has as good or better sensory input regardless of weather, road markings or lack of such etc. I don't see it happening without some additional aid either, some sort of position markers along the road, or radio senders, magnetic markings, GPS, blah - some sort of sure position reference.
 
Well that would be nice, but there are many huge hurdles till that is achieved. You'd basically need a car that is more intelligent (reacting faster) than a human and has as good or better sensory input regardless of weather, road markings or lack of such etc. I don't see it happening without some additional aid either, some sort of position markers along the road, or radio senders, magnetic markings, GPS, blah - some sort of sure position reference.

Agreed, which is why we're still so very far away from Minority Report style cars or Total Recall type cabs. :) Would be great, and it's fascinating seeing each little step and breakthrough that's achieved towards those goals, but still a long long ways away.

Regards,
SB
 
Back
Top