5 ms·

You're not a free flight aviator, are you? I don't mean to be rude, it's just that I've found that people who don't fly things are always much more optimistic a

You're not a free flight aviator, are you? I don't mean to be rude, it's just that I've found that people who don't fly things are always much more optimistic and naive about the realities of air travel than actual pilots are. I'm not trying to sound snarky- I had the same level of optimism and bright ideas for the uses of air travel until I got an aerospace engineering degree and started flying hang gliders. Sailplanes wouldn't work for commuting because of, in order: 1. Difficulty of training 2. Pilot liability for accidents 3. Weather 4. Space required to take off and land

amelius 8y ago
1 could be handled by a full autopilot; perhaps it can make 2 a non-issue; and by planning aircraft landing and take off centrally, 4 could be dealt with as well.
- Toutou 8y ago
  Autonomous car: - drives pretty much on a plane - able to stop when confused - precise speed and direction control - stable (i.e. does not oscillate or slide) - uses the same environment (the actual road) for reference and "handling" (tire grip) - anyone with IQ > 70 can drive one Autonomous sailplane: - flies in 3D space with pitch, roll, yaw - has both MAX (Vne) and MIN (stall) speed, can't stop and wait - can't even stop descending (!) - HEAVILY influenced by wind and thermal conditions - pretty unstable, oscillates when upset - can not use ground as visual reference reliably - flying one is no joke even for a human, requires serious training Good luck with your full autopilot.
  - cr0sh 8y ago
    > Good luck with your full autopilot. While it doesn't completely negate your argument... https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/zero-hab-glider/ https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/zero-hab-glider/ http://izzybrand.com/ http://izzybrand.com/
  - dchichkov 8y ago
    Autonomous car is harder than autonomous plaine. An autonomous plane can be flown with near-zero accidents by dGPS and traffic control alone. Try that with a car ;) . But take an autonomus plane, add an atmospheric model - you can have an autonomous sailplane.
    - quacked 8y ago
      It can be FLOWN with near zero-accidents by dGPS and control alone. That's steady/level flight, not counting issues with weather, launching, landing, and responding to in-flight emergencies. In a driving failure case, you crash or slow down, and you generally keep the accident constrained to the road. In a flying failure case, you've got a high-speed projectile moving in 3 directions.
      - dchichkov 8y ago
        Flown = Takeoff, flight, landing, emergencies handling. What pilots usually do during emergency is to go through the checklist. There is not much room for improvisation. Vehicles - it is a completely different level of problem. If you try to drive with dGPS alone, you will collide almost immediately. Even on the empty road, because dGPS is not good enough. And actually, it is almost AGI-complete problem, as you need to model and interact with other traffic participants.
dchichkov 8y ago
I'm a sailplane, powerplane and a paraglider pilot and experimental airplane owner, with two decades of soaring flight behind. I have a micro-scale meteorology and atmosphere modeling as a hobby. I work as an engineer and computer vision researcher, on autonomous vehicle project. My expert opinion - for limited delivery applications sailplanes could work. You need to do it right - sample and model atmosphere from the vehicle and ground, use gravity to accelerate and decelerate to flying speed, complete automation to remove the pilot. It's not easy. But it is not impossible. (Incidentally, if someone is willing to drop me ~500k in an attempt to build a prototype - I might consider investing the time required.)
- quacked 8y ago
  I agree with you for "limited delivery applications", by if we're talking about limited delivery applications, why wouldn't we just use low-cost powered flight? Much safer and more controllable.
  - dchichkov 8y ago
    Low cost eVTOL flight? It has high external costs of noise pollution. Also the eVTOL is nessesarily a complicated machine. The cost of that complexity is high. By talking sailplanes, I didn't mean unpowered flight. Of course you need power, to counteract drag . I was primarily referring to a form-factor (clean, efficient and and silent like a sailplane) and to a mode of takeoff and landing (convert speed to altitude with a wing, instead of eVTOL).
Robotbeat 8y ago
I'm in training to become one. I've flown a sailplane a few times now. I'm merely pointing out one method that would allow near-elimination of noise. ...and you can fly a sailplane at a younger age (13 for solo flight) than you can drive (usually 16). And driving has most of those concerns as well.

amelius 8y ago

1 could be handled by a full autopilot; perhaps it can make 2 a non-issue; and by planning aircraft landing and take off centrally, 4 could be dealt with as well.

Toutou 8y ago
Autonomous car: - drives pretty much on a plane - able to stop when confused - precise speed and direction control - stable (i.e. does not oscillate or slide) - uses the same environment (the actual road) for reference and "handling" (tire grip) - anyone with IQ > 70 can drive one Autonomous sailplane: - flies in 3D space with pitch, roll, yaw - has both MAX (Vne) and MIN (stall) speed, can't stop and wait - can't even stop descending (!) - HEAVILY influenced by wind and thermal conditions - pretty unstable, oscillates when upset - can not use ground as visual reference reliably - flying one is no joke even for a human, requires serious training Good luck with your full autopilot.
- cr0sh 8y ago
  > Good luck with your full autopilot. While it doesn't completely negate your argument... https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/zero-hab-glider/ https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/zero-hab-glider/ http://izzybrand.com/ http://izzybrand.com/
- dchichkov 8y ago
  Autonomous car is harder than autonomous plaine. An autonomous plane can be flown with near-zero accidents by dGPS and traffic control alone. Try that with a car ;) . But take an autonomus plane, add an atmospheric model - you can have an autonomous sailplane.
  - quacked 8y ago
    It can be FLOWN with near zero-accidents by dGPS and control alone. That's steady/level flight, not counting issues with weather, launching, landing, and responding to in-flight emergencies. In a driving failure case, you crash or slow down, and you generally keep the accident constrained to the road. In a flying failure case, you've got a high-speed projectile moving in 3 directions.
    - dchichkov 8y ago
      Flown = Takeoff, flight, landing, emergencies handling. What pilots usually do during emergency is to go through the checklist. There is not much room for improvisation. Vehicles - it is a completely different level of problem. If you try to drive with dGPS alone, you will collide almost immediately. Even on the empty road, because dGPS is not good enough. And actually, it is almost AGI-complete problem, as you need to model and interact with other traffic participants.

dchichkov 8y ago

I'm a sailplane, powerplane and a paraglider pilot and experimental airplane owner, with two decades of soaring flight behind. I have a micro-scale meteorology and atmosphere modeling as a hobby. I work as an engineer and computer vision researcher, on autonomous vehicle project. My expert opinion - for limited delivery applications sailplanes could work. You need to do it right - sample and model atmosphere from the vehicle and ground, use gravity to accelerate and decelerate to flying speed, complete automation to remove the pilot. It's not easy. But it is not impossible. (Incidentally, if someone is willing to drop me ~500k in an attempt to build a prototype - I might consider investing the time required.)

quacked 8y ago
I agree with you for "limited delivery applications", by if we're talking about limited delivery applications, why wouldn't we just use low-cost powered flight? Much safer and more controllable.
- dchichkov 8y ago
  Low cost eVTOL flight? It has high external costs of noise pollution. Also the eVTOL is nessesarily a complicated machine. The cost of that complexity is high. By talking sailplanes, I didn't mean unpowered flight. Of course you need power, to counteract drag . I was primarily referring to a form-factor (clean, efficient and and silent like a sailplane) and to a mode of takeoff and landing (convert speed to altitude with a wing, instead of eVTOL).

Robotbeat 8y ago

I'm in training to become one. I've flown a sailplane a few times now. I'm merely pointing out one method that would allow near-elimination of noise. ...and you can fly a sailplane at a younger age (13 for solo flight) than you can drive (usually 16). And driving has most of those concerns as well.