4 ms·

I feel like the only person in the world who doesn't want flying cars. With cars, a crash isn't necessarily fatal. But with flying cars... any failure means car

by tomc1985 10y ago

I feel like the only person in the world who doesn't want flying cars. With cars, a crash isn't necessarily fatal. But with flying cars... any failure means cars fall out of the sky, woe be to who/whatever's in and/or under http://io9.gizmodo.com/5888216/the-first-flying-car-was-based-on-the-ford-pinto-and-killed-its-inventor http://io9.gizmodo.com/5888216/the-first-flying-car-was-base... But unfortunately the current culture's rampant and excessive technology fetishism means that people can't stop dreaming of them :/

nsxwolf 10y ago
Ballistic parachutes will help with that some.
- calcifer 10y ago
  Ballistic recovery systems usually require a minimum altitude of around 1000 feet, so they are not really an option for urban settings. CAPS [0] for example needs 920 feet. As of August 2016, it was activated 83 times, of which only 69 were successful and there was 1 fatality [1]. [0] https://cirrusaircraft.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/CAPS_Guide.pdf https://cirrusaircraft.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/CAPS_G... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_Recovery_Systems#Deployments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_Recovery_Systems#Dep...
soared 10y ago
Are you just operating under the assumption that no one will invent the seatbelt of flying cars? That cars will just fall out of the sky with no attempt at saving a passengers life? Eventually someone will invent a big balloon that pops out of the bottom of cars to catch them as they fall, or a parachute, or something better no one has thought of yet.
- xenihn 10y ago
  What about the people that it lands on?
- tomc1985 10y ago
  > Eventually maybe someone FTFY Because it's going to have to be truly fool-proof to withstand the drunks, idiots, and downright malice on roads today. And that parachute system better know how to land on solid ground and not, say, someone's house. I do NOT want anyone but professional pilots piloting big heavy flying things over my head, my stuff, or my house
  - sanswork 10y ago
    You're assuming that the occupants will have control of the things. Once you leave the ground autopilot gets a lot easier as you have more space/visibility and fewer random obstacles. And a car is going to be just as dangerous to you flying off the road into the side of your house as one falling from the sky slowed slightly by a parachute.
    - tomc1985 10y ago
      I beg to differ. There is a mile or two of snaky two-lanes roads with unguarded hairpin curves whose edges lead down small embankments with houses (some protected by trees, others not) on my commute home. Despite the high traffic (it's a feeder road connecting an interstate with a boulevard) and the fact that it consistently backs up during rush hour, plus there will frequently be (crazy!!) pedestrians walking up its sides... and I have never, ever seen a single accident or emergency response vehicle because not just because some guy couldn't complete the turn, but at all. No smashed houses, nothing. Sure it's one example but I would argue that a busy road next door and a busy skyway overhead are entirely different things with very different risk profiles. IF the vehicles are self-driving that perhaps it will be safer. I don't think current autopilot technology can handle crowded, low-speed scenarios that you'd see in such a world. Maybe the tech catches up, maybe not
      - sanswork 10y ago
        http://abc11.com/news/raleigh-man-fed-up-after-house-hit-by-car-for-6th-time/1469768/ http://abc11.com/news/raleigh-man-fed-up-after-house-hit-by-... >I don't think current autopilot technology can handle crowded, low-speed scenarios that you'd see in such a world. Why don't you think they can?
- skybrian 10y ago
  Airplanes have been around a long time. Commercial aviation is much safer than general aviation, and that's with everyone being a trained pilot. With airplanes, simple things like running out of fuel can be fatal. Yes, it happens. [1] There are small airplanes with parachutes [2]. It's a big safety advance, but it still doesn't always help. You still need training in when to pull the parachute. [1] http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2016/12/why-would-a-pilot-let-his-plane-run-out-of-fuel.html http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2016/12/why-would-a-pilot-let-h... [2] https://cirrusaircraft.com/innovation/airframe-parachute/ https://cirrusaircraft.com/innovation/airframe-parachute/
stagbeetle 10y ago
When I think of flying cars, I think of hovercrafts. It would a step in the right direction for maximizing quality of life in the first world. Poor roads (due to stress and lack of maintenance) being the main irritant at the moment. Hover crafts would: make tollbooths obsolete (their main function: road-tax for maintenance -- gone), reduce accidents all around (trivial: liquid spills, minor: flats and whip lash, major: hydroplaning, ice-caused accidents, and crushed-by-car accidents), decrease consumer and government costs (via aforementioned need for tollbooths and road maint, wear-and-tear/ car maint, and insurance), and, as well, keep the aesthetic quality of the roads intact for longer. Also: leaders plant the seeds into their followers imaginations. Electric cars and getting to Mars are relatively boring things (think: mass-media popularity), but Musk was able to get everyone on-board, although at the cost of promising Utopia. The same can be done against flying cars, if one is possessed on the issue.
- pixl97 10y ago
  >Poor roads (due to stress and lack of maintenance) Uh, hovercraft (and flying things) are extremely loud. Their weight causes things not well attached under them to go flinging out at high speed. You have to keep the ground pretty clean to keep peoples heads from getting knocked off.
  - stagbeetle 10y ago
    The loudness is definitely a problem, but it looks like there's headway being made on helicopter noise-reduction that could be transferred over to hovercrafts. On second issue, do you mean rocks and sharp objects that could be thrown from the air being pushed out? I don't know how applicable it is to hovercrafts in this situation. We're either pushing air up or down, not side-ways. I don't imagine a rogue knife will be a problem for anyone else but the owner of the vehicle (a quick-fix would be to use a catcher cage). But none of thee issues damn hovercraft. It'd be more likely the technology's just not at a practical level.
- hutzlibu 10y ago
  "Poor roads (due to stress and lack of maintenance) being the main irritant at the moment." My main problem with roads are not the roads, but all the noisy, stinking cars on them. They all have a explosion engine after all ... so I will be allready very happy, if electric cars become standard ... and citys enjoyable again. And then maybe we can focus on anti-grav etc. ... ;)

nsxwolf 10y ago

Ballistic parachutes will help with that some.

calcifer 10y ago
Ballistic recovery systems usually require a minimum altitude of around 1000 feet, so they are not really an option for urban settings. CAPS [0] for example needs 920 feet. As of August 2016, it was activated 83 times, of which only 69 were successful and there was 1 fatality [1]. [0] https://cirrusaircraft.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/CAPS_Guide.pdf https://cirrusaircraft.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/CAPS_G... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_Recovery_Systems#Deployments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_Recovery_Systems#Dep...

soared 10y ago

Are you just operating under the assumption that no one will invent the seatbelt of flying cars? That cars will just fall out of the sky with no attempt at saving a passengers life? Eventually someone will invent a big balloon that pops out of the bottom of cars to catch them as they fall, or a parachute, or something better no one has thought of yet.

xenihn 10y ago
What about the people that it lands on?
tomc1985 10y ago
> Eventually maybe someone FTFY Because it's going to have to be truly fool-proof to withstand the drunks, idiots, and downright malice on roads today. And that parachute system better know how to land on solid ground and not, say, someone's house. I do NOT want anyone but professional pilots piloting big heavy flying things over my head, my stuff, or my house
- sanswork 10y ago
  You're assuming that the occupants will have control of the things. Once you leave the ground autopilot gets a lot easier as you have more space/visibility and fewer random obstacles. And a car is going to be just as dangerous to you flying off the road into the side of your house as one falling from the sky slowed slightly by a parachute.
  - tomc1985 10y ago
    I beg to differ. There is a mile or two of snaky two-lanes roads with unguarded hairpin curves whose edges lead down small embankments with houses (some protected by trees, others not) on my commute home. Despite the high traffic (it's a feeder road connecting an interstate with a boulevard) and the fact that it consistently backs up during rush hour, plus there will frequently be (crazy!!) pedestrians walking up its sides... and I have never, ever seen a single accident or emergency response vehicle because not just because some guy couldn't complete the turn, but at all. No smashed houses, nothing. Sure it's one example but I would argue that a busy road next door and a busy skyway overhead are entirely different things with very different risk profiles. IF the vehicles are self-driving that perhaps it will be safer. I don't think current autopilot technology can handle crowded, low-speed scenarios that you'd see in such a world. Maybe the tech catches up, maybe not
    - sanswork 10y ago
      http://abc11.com/news/raleigh-man-fed-up-after-house-hit-by-car-for-6th-time/1469768/ http://abc11.com/news/raleigh-man-fed-up-after-house-hit-by-... >I don't think current autopilot technology can handle crowded, low-speed scenarios that you'd see in such a world. Why don't you think they can?
skybrian 10y ago
Airplanes have been around a long time. Commercial aviation is much safer than general aviation, and that's with everyone being a trained pilot. With airplanes, simple things like running out of fuel can be fatal. Yes, it happens. [1] There are small airplanes with parachutes [2]. It's a big safety advance, but it still doesn't always help. You still need training in when to pull the parachute. [1] http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2016/12/why-would-a-pilot-let-his-plane-run-out-of-fuel.html http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2016/12/why-would-a-pilot-let-h... [2] https://cirrusaircraft.com/innovation/airframe-parachute/ https://cirrusaircraft.com/innovation/airframe-parachute/

stagbeetle 10y ago

When I think of flying cars, I think of hovercrafts. It would a step in the right direction for maximizing quality of life in the first world. Poor roads (due to stress and lack of maintenance) being the main irritant at the moment. Hover crafts would: make tollbooths obsolete (their main function: road-tax for maintenance -- gone), reduce accidents all around (trivial: liquid spills, minor: flats and whip lash, major: hydroplaning, ice-caused accidents, and crushed-by-car accidents), decrease consumer and government costs (via aforementioned need for tollbooths and road maint, wear-and-tear/ car maint, and insurance), and, as well, keep the aesthetic quality of the roads intact for longer. Also: leaders plant the seeds into their followers imaginations. Electric cars and getting to Mars are relatively boring things (think: mass-media popularity), but Musk was able to get everyone on-board, although at the cost of promising Utopia. The same can be done against flying cars, if one is possessed on the issue.

pixl97 10y ago
>Poor roads (due to stress and lack of maintenance) Uh, hovercraft (and flying things) are extremely loud. Their weight causes things not well attached under them to go flinging out at high speed. You have to keep the ground pretty clean to keep peoples heads from getting knocked off.
- stagbeetle 10y ago
  The loudness is definitely a problem, but it looks like there's headway being made on helicopter noise-reduction that could be transferred over to hovercrafts. On second issue, do you mean rocks and sharp objects that could be thrown from the air being pushed out? I don't know how applicable it is to hovercrafts in this situation. We're either pushing air up or down, not side-ways. I don't imagine a rogue knife will be a problem for anyone else but the owner of the vehicle (a quick-fix would be to use a catcher cage). But none of thee issues damn hovercraft. It'd be more likely the technology's just not at a practical level.
hutzlibu 10y ago
"Poor roads (due to stress and lack of maintenance) being the main irritant at the moment." My main problem with roads are not the roads, but all the noisy, stinking cars on them. They all have a explosion engine after all ... so I will be allready very happy, if electric cars become standard ... and citys enjoyable again. And then maybe we can focus on anti-grav etc. ... ;)