3 ms·

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that there's basically no chance that flying cars become a meaning part of life in America in my lifetime (I just turned

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that there's basically no chance that flying cars become a meaning part of life in America in my lifetime (I just turned 40).

burkaman 1y ago
I agree with you, but keep in mind that's probably what 40-year-olds in 1903 said about planes after hearing about the Wright brothers. Sometimes things do actually change.
- cpmsmith 1y ago
  If we assume this means "in the next 50 years", they wouldn't be totally wrong. You could make the case airplanes were only on the cusp of being "a meaning[ful] part of life in America" by 1953 – planes only overtook trains for domestic US travel in 1955, and 1957 for trans-Atlantic. https://airandspace.si.edu/explore/stories/commercial-aviation-mid-century#:~:text=In%201955%2C%20for%20the%20first%20time%2C%20more%20people%20in%20the%20United%20States%20traveled%20by%20air%20than%20by%20train%2E https://airandspace.si.edu/explore/stories/commercial-aviati...
oldpersonintx2 1y ago
[dead]
strangattractor 1y ago
Reminds me of how Popular Mechanics use to alternate between Flying Cars and return of the Blimps issues. Scott is a sport pilot enthusiast and approached the evaluation from that perspective. I don't think there are many pilots, myself included, that believe we are on the verge of flying cars for mass transportation. They are expensive to purchase, maintain and impractical for many reasons.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
klipklop 1y ago
I agree. In the US I have seen simple regional public transportation projects take decades and they are still not complete. A single on/off ramp (literally a quarter mile of road) will take 5 years. There is just no way a public flying car infrastructure can be built in the US in the next 30-50 years you are alive.
- WithinReason 1y ago
  Isn't the point of flying cars that they don't need roads?
  - saghm 1y ago
    Unless you expect that most people would be fine with an unbounded number of flying cars (presumably at least as noisy as existing ones) without speed limits in their neighborhood, there's going to have to be some sort of infrastructure. Just because they won't literally be roads doesn't mean that the same types of social dynamics won't apply.
  - littlekey 1y ago
    Presumably they would need roads in the sense of arbitrary "surfaces" on top of one another, so that you could shift lanes vertically as well as horizontally. And then you would need at least a visual indicator of which lane you're in, maybe even force feedback similar to bott's dots.
  - nradov 1y ago
    We would need a lot of landing pads free of nearby hazards (trees, wires, antennas). Those pads generally can't just be added on to existing buildings: most high-rise buildings weren't designed to support the necessary weight, plus roofs are already full of other equipment. Assuming appropriate sites can be found, there will also be a long permitting process to get construction approval. The latest eVTOL aircraft are quieter than conventional helicopters but still loud so anyone living and working nearby is going to complain. I'm sure they'll also raise environmental impact concerns in many areas because the noise will prevent the endangered yellow-footed salamander from laying eggs or whatever so working through the mandated mitigation process also takes years.
dzhiurgis 1y ago
In your opinion, what's more likely to mainstream first - bipedal bots or eVTOL's (flying cars)?
- dopamean 1y ago
  Super late to this but I'd take bipedal bots. That's not to say I'm particularly bullish on that idea though. Seems like it might be simpler to build purpose built robots for specific tasks. They'd probably be faster.
  - dzhiurgis 1y ago
    I'm not entirely convinced. On one hand for bots you pretty much need AGI which Tesla is near solving. On another hand you need massive battery improvement for flights to move from toy to actually useful. But also there are more than 1 eVTOLS that already been certified for flight. Bots would admittedly be far more useful in helping with tons of various tasks (I'm sure each task will be a subscription), but eVTOLs would unlock new capability.

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that there's basically no chance that flying cars become a meaning part of life in America in my lifetime (I just turned 40).

burkaman 1y ago

I agree with you, but keep in mind that's probably what 40-year-olds in 1903 said about planes after hearing about the Wright brothers. Sometimes things do actually change.

cpmsmith 1y ago
If we assume this means "in the next 50 years", they wouldn't be totally wrong. You could make the case airplanes were only on the cusp of being "a meaning[ful] part of life in America" by 1953 – planes only overtook trains for domestic US travel in 1955, and 1957 for trans-Atlantic. https://airandspace.si.edu/explore/stories/commercial-aviation-mid-century#:~:text=In%201955%2C%20for%20the%20first%20time%2C%20more%20people%20in%20the%20United%20States%20traveled%20by%20air%20than%20by%20train%2E https://airandspace.si.edu/explore/stories/commercial-aviati...

oldpersonintx2 1y ago

[dead]

strangattractor 1y ago

Reminds me of how Popular Mechanics use to alternate between Flying Cars and return of the Blimps issues. Scott is a sport pilot enthusiast and approached the evaluation from that perspective. I don't think there are many pilots, myself included, that believe we are on the verge of flying cars for mass transportation. They are expensive to purchase, maintain and impractical for many reasons.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

klipklop 1y ago

I agree. In the US I have seen simple regional public transportation projects take decades and they are still not complete. A single on/off ramp (literally a quarter mile of road) will take 5 years. There is just no way a public flying car infrastructure can be built in the US in the next 30-50 years you are alive.

WithinReason 1y ago
Isn't the point of flying cars that they don't need roads?
- saghm 1y ago
  Unless you expect that most people would be fine with an unbounded number of flying cars (presumably at least as noisy as existing ones) without speed limits in their neighborhood, there's going to have to be some sort of infrastructure. Just because they won't literally be roads doesn't mean that the same types of social dynamics won't apply.
- littlekey 1y ago
  Presumably they would need roads in the sense of arbitrary "surfaces" on top of one another, so that you could shift lanes vertically as well as horizontally. And then you would need at least a visual indicator of which lane you're in, maybe even force feedback similar to bott's dots.
- nradov 1y ago
  We would need a lot of landing pads free of nearby hazards (trees, wires, antennas). Those pads generally can't just be added on to existing buildings: most high-rise buildings weren't designed to support the necessary weight, plus roofs are already full of other equipment. Assuming appropriate sites can be found, there will also be a long permitting process to get construction approval. The latest eVTOL aircraft are quieter than conventional helicopters but still loud so anyone living and working nearby is going to complain. I'm sure they'll also raise environmental impact concerns in many areas because the noise will prevent the endangered yellow-footed salamander from laying eggs or whatever so working through the mandated mitigation process also takes years.

dzhiurgis 1y ago

In your opinion, what's more likely to mainstream first - bipedal bots or eVTOL's (flying cars)?

dopamean 1y ago
Super late to this but I'd take bipedal bots. That's not to say I'm particularly bullish on that idea though. Seems like it might be simpler to build purpose built robots for specific tasks. They'd probably be faster.
- dzhiurgis 1y ago
  I'm not entirely convinced. On one hand for bots you pretty much need AGI which Tesla is near solving. On another hand you need massive battery improvement for flights to move from toy to actually useful. But also there are more than 1 eVTOLS that already been certified for flight. Bots would admittedly be far more useful in helping with tons of various tasks (I'm sure each task will be a subscription), but eVTOLs would unlock new capability.