5 ms·

Why do people immediately understand the negative externalities and implications of self-navigating cars, but once flight is added into the mix, they seem to th

Why do people immediately understand the negative externalities and implications of self-navigating cars, but once flight is added into the mix, they seem to think that it's a viable solution? The complexity and upkeep added once your hardware has to be in the air (at our current mass-market technology levels) are far from inconsequential. I wonder if once "flight" is added to an "automated" idea, it gets so far outside of people's understanding that it seems easy. People know how hard it is to drive a car, but they have no idea what's required to drive an airplane.

jandrese 8y ago
There are definitely maintenance concerns, but free flight autopilot is a much easier problem than autonomous ground vehicle piloting. All of the proposed vehicles I've seen have a failsafe built in--typically a parachute, but you are correct that if it falls on someone's house, car, or person there is going to be a problem.
- quacked 8y ago
  Parachutes need a certain amount of height to work correctly, are difficult to steer, can get twisted, tangled, etc and are at the mercy of overall atmospheric conditions. Free flight autopilot I agree isn't a tough problem to solve- it's free flight launching, landing, and responding to rapid and dangerous changes in atmospheric conditions on autopilot that I'd be worried about. When you're landing in free flight, you have one chance to set up your approach and landing, and conditions at the LZ can change rapidy- without constant distance and wind measuring equipment as well as enough space to come in a little too high, you're in a very difficult and dangerous situation. So if we're now taking about needing essentially an airstrip with sensors, it's basically an airport. I don't think that autopiloted free flight is an impossibility, I just think it's an impossibility for mass-produced untrained consumer use.
WhompingWindows 8y ago
Can you actually provide examples of the complexity and upkeep? To my eyes, it seems like these would be easier to maintain than many ICE vehicles, if they're just batteries, electric motors, and some kind of lift-generating blades.
- quacked 8y ago
  In order to find problems with a car, you drive it until it starts making a weird noise or won't start, and then you pull over, call AAA, and send it to the mechanic. There's no "pre-drive" inspection required like there is with all flying vehicles (it's not even safe to fly a low-complexity hang glider without a detailed pre-flight). The upkeep I'm talking about comes with constant and rigorous inspections of all of your single parts, and the consequences that come with failure. If one of your lift-generating blades has microcracks in it because it's been vibrating after an improperly set nut got a little loose, you could experience fan failure during flight and crash.
ChicagoBoy11 8y ago
Genuinely would love for you to say more. As a (relatively newly minted) pilot, my head goes the opposite ways. All the negative externalities and issues around self-driving cars make sense to me, but I end up thinking that these are all simpler and easier dealt with in the flying case. What am I missing?
- quacked 8y ago
  Launching, landing, and responding to emergency situations are all things I wouldn't trust an autopilot with. Liability involved when there's crashes on private lands would be extraordinarily difficult- as you know, airspace is managed much differently than roads are. Imagine if you could get hit by a car in your second-story bedroom.

jandrese 8y ago

There are definitely maintenance concerns, but free flight autopilot is a much easier problem than autonomous ground vehicle piloting. All of the proposed vehicles I've seen have a failsafe built in--typically a parachute, but you are correct that if it falls on someone's house, car, or person there is going to be a problem.

quacked 8y ago
Parachutes need a certain amount of height to work correctly, are difficult to steer, can get twisted, tangled, etc and are at the mercy of overall atmospheric conditions. Free flight autopilot I agree isn't a tough problem to solve- it's free flight launching, landing, and responding to rapid and dangerous changes in atmospheric conditions on autopilot that I'd be worried about. When you're landing in free flight, you have one chance to set up your approach and landing, and conditions at the LZ can change rapidy- without constant distance and wind measuring equipment as well as enough space to come in a little too high, you're in a very difficult and dangerous situation. So if we're now taking about needing essentially an airstrip with sensors, it's basically an airport. I don't think that autopiloted free flight is an impossibility, I just think it's an impossibility for mass-produced untrained consumer use.

WhompingWindows 8y ago

Can you actually provide examples of the complexity and upkeep? To my eyes, it seems like these would be easier to maintain than many ICE vehicles, if they're just batteries, electric motors, and some kind of lift-generating blades.

quacked 8y ago
In order to find problems with a car, you drive it until it starts making a weird noise or won't start, and then you pull over, call AAA, and send it to the mechanic. There's no "pre-drive" inspection required like there is with all flying vehicles (it's not even safe to fly a low-complexity hang glider without a detailed pre-flight). The upkeep I'm talking about comes with constant and rigorous inspections of all of your single parts, and the consequences that come with failure. If one of your lift-generating blades has microcracks in it because it's been vibrating after an improperly set nut got a little loose, you could experience fan failure during flight and crash.

ChicagoBoy11 8y ago

Genuinely would love for you to say more. As a (relatively newly minted) pilot, my head goes the opposite ways. All the negative externalities and issues around self-driving cars make sense to me, but I end up thinking that these are all simpler and easier dealt with in the flying case. What am I missing?

quacked 8y ago
Launching, landing, and responding to emergency situations are all things I wouldn't trust an autopilot with. Liability involved when there's crashes on private lands would be extraordinarily difficult- as you know, airspace is managed much differently than roads are. Imagine if you could get hit by a car in your second-story bedroom.