4 ms·

1. Airplanes are actually pretty energy efficient for their speed, especially since they can avoid fuel wasting terrain and avoid stopping and starting like car

1. Airplanes are actually pretty energy efficient for their speed, especially since they can avoid fuel wasting terrain and avoid stopping and starting like cars. 2. Airplanes have an excellent safety record, far surpassing cars. 3. Maybe, but that's a small price to pay imho. I understand that points 1 and 2 are based off commercial aviation and not general aviation, but I think it does reflect a general trend in society to try and reflexively say "it will never work, here's why" rather than "here are some reasons why it might not work, let's see if we can fix them"

chrisco255 6y ago
1. They can only avoid these stops because they are only carrying their passengers part of the way on their journey. No one is flying just to get to an airport. They have to leave the airport to go somewhere else. Also, heavy cargo is typically carried on trains, barges and trucks for energy trade off reasons. 2. Flying cars would not necessarily have the same safety record as commercial airlines. These airlines are regulated and each plane is meticulously maintained. Each pilot is extensively trained. A mass market flying vehicle would not have these benefits. The energy trade off problem is just physics. It does take a lot of energy to keep mass suspended above earth for any length of time. Unless someone develops antigravity tech or we discover a more dense form of energy storage than jet fuel, it's unlikely to happen.
bobthepanda 6y ago
1 is only really true for long distance travel, and in the context of planes where you have to pre-file a flight plan with the route planned out in advance. This would be wildly impractical for any sort of intra-urban travel with current commute volumes. 2 is true but planes are flown by professional pilots. The skill of the average American driver is extremely poor. 3 would lead to local jursidictions banning flying cars faster than one could blink. It is already pretty much impossible to route new highways through populated areas in the US for this exact reason.

chrisco255 6y ago

1. They can only avoid these stops because they are only carrying their passengers part of the way on their journey. No one is flying just to get to an airport. They have to leave the airport to go somewhere else. Also, heavy cargo is typically carried on trains, barges and trucks for energy trade off reasons. 2. Flying cars would not necessarily have the same safety record as commercial airlines. These airlines are regulated and each plane is meticulously maintained. Each pilot is extensively trained. A mass market flying vehicle would not have these benefits. The energy trade off problem is just physics. It does take a lot of energy to keep mass suspended above earth for any length of time. Unless someone develops antigravity tech or we discover a more dense form of energy storage than jet fuel, it's unlikely to happen.

bobthepanda 6y ago

1 is only really true for long distance travel, and in the context of planes where you have to pre-file a flight plan with the route planned out in advance. This would be wildly impractical for any sort of intra-urban travel with current commute volumes. 2 is true but planes are flown by professional pilots. The skill of the average American driver is extremely poor. 3 would lead to local jursidictions banning flying cars faster than one could blink. It is already pretty much impossible to route new highways through populated areas in the US for this exact reason.