3 ms·

I was actually just thinking that VTOL aircraft could solve the housing crisis considering we’re using 1000s of acres of prime real estate in every city for air

I was actually just thinking that VTOL aircraft could solve the housing crisis considering we’re using 1000s of acres of prime real estate in every city for airports. Anyone want to flesh out that idea and write it up? (I’d be curious if anyone could correct my thinking instead of downvoting)

hrgiger 4y ago
I didnt downvote, I think those VTOLs also at the end gonna land somewhere, its reminds me this pic [1]. https://www.google.com/search?q=1+bus+vs+related+cars&newwindow=1&client=firefox-b-e&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiiv9r4rqj4AhVM_qQKHeppB3IQ_AUoAXoECAEQAw&biw=1472&bih=725&dpr=1.3#imgrc=WZB5OwYa19nwaM https://www.google.com/search?q=1+bus+vs+related+cars&newwin...
- mrfusion 4y ago
  That’s true but runways are quite long and we need several of them at least. And we wouldn’t need the same level of centralization for small landing pads.
  - ncmncm 4y ago
    No city will be scrapping its runways. Period. So if you add VTOL pads that takes more of high value real estate.
- jillesvangurp 4y ago
  They can land on roofs, in parks, any open area large enough basically. That kind of is the whole point being able to land anywhere. Short term, anything that already accommodates helicopters would be good enough. The problem with those is mainly that helicopters are very noisy so people don't like to have helipads everywhere. But considering, these VTOL planes tend to be a lot less noisy, having them land in more places might end up being less controversial. Either way, it would be a perfectly valid way to commute 50-80 miles in ten minutes or so and skip the 2 hour car ride. I could see that become a popular thing. Initially probably quite expensive but the pitch for these devices seems to be that they could be mass produced cheaply.
  - hrgiger 4y ago
    Yes my answer was for the airport, I definitely would like to see them around and try it!
  - jltsiren 4y ago
    Any powered aircraft large enough to carry a person is inherently noisy and dangerous. All serious vertiport proposals I have seen for quiet electric aircraft assume a dedicated facility at least as large as a city block. And even those are only feasible if there is no significant NIMBYism in the area. Rooftop landing pads could work, at least in principle. They are however risky enough that Western cities often outright ban them in urban areas or limit their use to emergency situations.
TulliusCicero 4y ago
There's no way airports use enough land to be able to 'solve the housing crisis' by using it for housing. The housing crisis is an entirely self-created problem by the societies it exists in, and it has little to do with amount of land. For example, Japan and South Korea have relative little land -- and in the case of Japan, very little non-mountainous land -- relative to their population, and yet rent prices there are quite affordable, even in the megacities of Tokyo and Seoul. Western cities tend to have some combination of greater restrictions on density/housing forms, and harder/more ambiguous red tape to develop new buildings. Relaxing these regulations would at least alleviate, it not outright solve the crisis, but people just don't wanna do that. It's not a technical issue, it's just that the political will isn't there. As an example of ambiguous red tape, take the ubiquitous "community meetings" that are common in US cities any time there's a major new development. It's common for neighbors to raise random objections that may or may not relate to any building codes or zoning regulations, and then a planning board to force the developer to adapt to those objections, or just block the project outright. What this means, is that there's really two sets of laws: one on the books, that was developed through normal democratic processes like city council members voting on them, or local initiatives passing, and then the second set is whatever the local residents feel like accepting in their heads. We would never accept this for other laws, the idea of, "well sure you didn't break any laws on paper, but local residents don't like what you did and a few raised a stink about it at a community meeting, so you're going to jail anyway." But that's how building permitting actually works. You can't just follow actual laws, you have to make the subset of people who show up to community meetings all happy.
yoz-y 4y ago
When people got thousands of cars, railway stations and bus stations didn’t disappear. This will be even more apparent with the really expensive VTOL aircraft for the mega rich. Plus you can’t really land anywhere since you do need charging infrastructure. Unless you are willing to spend days when recharging this beast from a 220V outlet.

hrgiger 4y ago

I didnt downvote, I think those VTOLs also at the end gonna land somewhere, its reminds me this pic [1]. https://www.google.com/search?q=1+bus+vs+related+cars&newwindow=1&client=firefox-b-e&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiiv9r4rqj4AhVM_qQKHeppB3IQ_AUoAXoECAEQAw&biw=1472&bih=725&dpr=1.3#imgrc=WZB5OwYa19nwaM https://www.google.com/search?q=1+bus+vs+related+cars&newwin...

mrfusion 4y ago
That’s true but runways are quite long and we need several of them at least. And we wouldn’t need the same level of centralization for small landing pads.
- ncmncm 4y ago
  No city will be scrapping its runways. Period. So if you add VTOL pads that takes more of high value real estate.
jillesvangurp 4y ago
They can land on roofs, in parks, any open area large enough basically. That kind of is the whole point being able to land anywhere. Short term, anything that already accommodates helicopters would be good enough. The problem with those is mainly that helicopters are very noisy so people don't like to have helipads everywhere. But considering, these VTOL planes tend to be a lot less noisy, having them land in more places might end up being less controversial. Either way, it would be a perfectly valid way to commute 50-80 miles in ten minutes or so and skip the 2 hour car ride. I could see that become a popular thing. Initially probably quite expensive but the pitch for these devices seems to be that they could be mass produced cheaply.
- hrgiger 4y ago
  Yes my answer was for the airport, I definitely would like to see them around and try it!
- jltsiren 4y ago
  Any powered aircraft large enough to carry a person is inherently noisy and dangerous. All serious vertiport proposals I have seen for quiet electric aircraft assume a dedicated facility at least as large as a city block. And even those are only feasible if there is no significant NIMBYism in the area. Rooftop landing pads could work, at least in principle. They are however risky enough that Western cities often outright ban them in urban areas or limit their use to emergency situations.

TulliusCicero 4y ago

There's no way airports use enough land to be able to 'solve the housing crisis' by using it for housing. The housing crisis is an entirely self-created problem by the societies it exists in, and it has little to do with amount of land. For example, Japan and South Korea have relative little land -- and in the case of Japan, very little non-mountainous land -- relative to their population, and yet rent prices there are quite affordable, even in the megacities of Tokyo and Seoul. Western cities tend to have some combination of greater restrictions on density/housing forms, and harder/more ambiguous red tape to develop new buildings. Relaxing these regulations would at least alleviate, it not outright solve the crisis, but people just don't wanna do that. It's not a technical issue, it's just that the political will isn't there. As an example of ambiguous red tape, take the ubiquitous "community meetings" that are common in US cities any time there's a major new development. It's common for neighbors to raise random objections that may or may not relate to any building codes or zoning regulations, and then a planning board to force the developer to adapt to those objections, or just block the project outright. What this means, is that there's really two sets of laws: one on the books, that was developed through normal democratic processes like city council members voting on them, or local initiatives passing, and then the second set is whatever the local residents feel like accepting in their heads. We would never accept this for other laws, the idea of, "well sure you didn't break any laws on paper, but local residents don't like what you did and a few raised a stink about it at a community meeting, so you're going to jail anyway." But that's how building permitting actually works. You can't just follow actual laws, you have to make the subset of people who show up to community meetings all happy.

yoz-y 4y ago

When people got thousands of cars, railway stations and bus stations didn’t disappear. This will be even more apparent with the really expensive VTOL aircraft for the mega rich. Plus you can’t really land anywhere since you do need charging infrastructure. Unless you are willing to spend days when recharging this beast from a 220V outlet.