4 ms·

I think the ideal scenario for this tech is running a downtown core to airport shuttle: - a short trip allows battery needs to not be excessive - bypass traff

I think the ideal scenario for this tech is running a downtown core to airport shuttle: - a short trip allows battery needs to not be excessive - bypass traffic, you don't have to go all that fast to get a huge speedup, and remove the extra buffer time on traffic uncertainty - radically less infrastructure than roads or rails, reduces the cost of adding more pickup zones In cites with poor airport to downtown infrastructure you could probably start off as a high-end service and charge i.e. 5x than an airport limo.

javiramos 9y ago
Yes, Manhattan-La Guardia
zhoujianfu 9y ago
And you could do the security check at the downtown station to offload some of that from the airport (while also handling the need to screen people before they get on the flying taxi.)
aarmenante 9y ago
Doesn’t a helicopter serve these needs? I think the problem is there isn’t a market for it yet. There is Blade in NYC and LA but it’s closer to 10x the price. I think the cost could be a lot lower if there was higher demand. I think there doesn’t need to be new tech to make this work. Helicopters are safe and reliable, but are out of reach financially for most. I don’t see how drones or multirotor would be able to compete on price for a very long time.
- prostoalex 9y ago
  If the drone is autonomous and electric motor-driven, at least the human labor cost and fuel cost are taken out of equation.
- FabHK 9y ago
  Why do you think electric drones have taken off as toys and for filming etc, when remote controlled helicopters have been available for ages? Because they have better properties for many use cases: much simpler mechanically, cheaper to operate, easier to control, etc. I’d also expect drones to be more reliable, but that remains to be seen.
  - 908087 9y ago
    There's a problem here, though. Drones can't autorotate, and autorotation is kind of an important safety feature for helicopters carrying humans.
    - FabHK 9y ago
      Don't know about the (8-rotor) eHang, but the 18-rotor Volocopter remains fully controllable with 3 rotor failures (or more, if they're benignly distributed), and has a ballistic rescue chute in addition (which is hard to fit on a heli). (Of course, you need a certain altitude for the BRS to kick in successfully, so low-level hover is a risk, just as with a helicopter.)
- 908087 9y ago
  Helicopters are generally safe, but Robinson helicopters are the exception, and are unfortunately incredibly common due to their comparatively low cost.
em3rgent0rdr 9y ago
But aren't the major airports already saturated at the capacity that their runways can handle?
- gpm 9y ago
  You wouldn't need a runway if you're using a helicopter/quadcopter like device, just a small landing pad (hell, you might be able to do it on a public street... but I imagine that would be a regulatory nightmare)
daurnimator 9y ago
You mean like what the Metlife building in NYC was designed for? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MetLife_Building#Helicopter_service https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MetLife_Building#Helicopter_se...
echevil 9y ago
I believe an express subway line can do a better job. Though the initial cost for building new infrastructure is high, it also have the other two benefits you mention: Bypass all ground traffic and being very predictable (in fact more predictable than flying cars as it won't be impacted by whether). Moreover it can carry much more people at much lower cost. The benefit of high capacity could probably compensate for the high initial cost. If regular subway is not fast enough, maglev train like the one connecting PVG airport to Longyang Rd subway station can complete its 19 miles trip in 8 minutes, with a fare less than 10 US dollars, and it has been running for almost two decades.
- FabHK 9y ago
  The question OP was trying to answer was not “what’s the best technology for this application”, but “what’s the best application for this technology”. And I agree, I’m thinking of short shuttle services in extremely congested cities, such as São Paulo, Jakarta, etc. Yes, they’d be better served by a good subway system, but good luck waiting for that.
  - romwell 9y ago
    If the best application for a technology is better served by another technology, then what's the point to begin with?
    - FabHK 9y ago
      1. The new technology is in its infancy, and we expect it to get better over time. 2. External constraints prevent the better solution from being implemented for now.
  - echevil 9y ago
    I’m just saying, we need to find other applications for this new technology. If we just want to connect city center to airports I’d so much prefer that people invest their money on trains which is a solution that can benefit lots of people rather than a just a few riches
windlessstorm 9y ago
Or let's call these hoppers. There would be small hopper stations every five or ten blocks. You hop into one hopper, it flies you to a nearby station avoiding all traffics and zig zag roads. You hop into another hopper to incrementally get to your destination. This way these drones dont need to have huge batteries or any other complicated features for long distance flight.

javiramos 9y ago

Yes, Manhattan-La Guardia

zhoujianfu 9y ago

And you could do the security check at the downtown station to offload some of that from the airport (while also handling the need to screen people before they get on the flying taxi.)

aarmenante 9y ago

Doesn’t a helicopter serve these needs? I think the problem is there isn’t a market for it yet. There is Blade in NYC and LA but it’s closer to 10x the price. I think the cost could be a lot lower if there was higher demand. I think there doesn’t need to be new tech to make this work. Helicopters are safe and reliable, but are out of reach financially for most. I don’t see how drones or multirotor would be able to compete on price for a very long time.

prostoalex 9y ago
If the drone is autonomous and electric motor-driven, at least the human labor cost and fuel cost are taken out of equation.
FabHK 9y ago
Why do you think electric drones have taken off as toys and for filming etc, when remote controlled helicopters have been available for ages? Because they have better properties for many use cases: much simpler mechanically, cheaper to operate, easier to control, etc. I’d also expect drones to be more reliable, but that remains to be seen.
- 908087 9y ago
  There's a problem here, though. Drones can't autorotate, and autorotation is kind of an important safety feature for helicopters carrying humans.
  - FabHK 9y ago
    Don't know about the (8-rotor) eHang, but the 18-rotor Volocopter remains fully controllable with 3 rotor failures (or more, if they're benignly distributed), and has a ballistic rescue chute in addition (which is hard to fit on a heli). (Of course, you need a certain altitude for the BRS to kick in successfully, so low-level hover is a risk, just as with a helicopter.)
908087 9y ago
Helicopters are generally safe, but Robinson helicopters are the exception, and are unfortunately incredibly common due to their comparatively low cost.

em3rgent0rdr 9y ago

But aren't the major airports already saturated at the capacity that their runways can handle?

gpm 9y ago
You wouldn't need a runway if you're using a helicopter/quadcopter like device, just a small landing pad (hell, you might be able to do it on a public street... but I imagine that would be a regulatory nightmare)

daurnimator 9y ago

You mean like what the Metlife building in NYC was designed for? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MetLife_Building#Helicopter_service https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MetLife_Building#Helicopter_se...

echevil 9y ago

I believe an express subway line can do a better job. Though the initial cost for building new infrastructure is high, it also have the other two benefits you mention: Bypass all ground traffic and being very predictable (in fact more predictable than flying cars as it won't be impacted by whether). Moreover it can carry much more people at much lower cost. The benefit of high capacity could probably compensate for the high initial cost. If regular subway is not fast enough, maglev train like the one connecting PVG airport to Longyang Rd subway station can complete its 19 miles trip in 8 minutes, with a fare less than 10 US dollars, and it has been running for almost two decades.

FabHK 9y ago
The question OP was trying to answer was not “what’s the best technology for this application”, but “what’s the best application for this technology”. And I agree, I’m thinking of short shuttle services in extremely congested cities, such as São Paulo, Jakarta, etc. Yes, they’d be better served by a good subway system, but good luck waiting for that.
- romwell 9y ago
  If the best application for a technology is better served by another technology, then what's the point to begin with?
  - FabHK 9y ago
    1. The new technology is in its infancy, and we expect it to get better over time. 2. External constraints prevent the better solution from being implemented for now.
- echevil 9y ago
  I’m just saying, we need to find other applications for this new technology. If we just want to connect city center to airports I’d so much prefer that people invest their money on trains which is a solution that can benefit lots of people rather than a just a few riches

windlessstorm 9y ago

Or let's call these hoppers. There would be small hopper stations every five or ten blocks. You hop into one hopper, it flies you to a nearby station avoiding all traffics and zig zag roads. You hop into another hopper to incrementally get to your destination. This way these drones dont need to have huge batteries or any other complicated features for long distance flight.