4 ms·

The victim in your link, if you look at the picture, was flying a single-rotor helicopter with what looks to be a 4+ foot wingspan. The prototype in the Amazon

The victim in your link, if you look at the picture, was flying a single-rotor helicopter with what looks to be a 4+ foot wingspan. The prototype in the Amazon video is an 8-rotor helicopter with little 4 to 6 inch wingspans. Anything that goes to production will have to pass FAA approval, so they will probably end up with some sort of hoop guard at the least. Negativity for the sake of negativity?

bigtunacan 13y ago
Not negativity for the sake of negativity. While the link I posted is a large single rotor helicopter, I was trying to show a worst case scenario. If Amazon Air does get off the ground then I would imagine the program expanding to delivering heavier packages over time, which would require larger quad copters and thus larger rotors and higher risk of more serious injuries. I have built and fly hobby planes and copters in my spare time. They are dangerous. Once, after one of my planes crashed near me, I picked it up without giving it a second thought and sliced my hand wide open on the still spinning front propeller. I don't necessarily believe this is a technology that will result in fatalities, but certainly injuries, especially to children and animals. On a less dangerous note; I fully expect some shenanigans from people shooting these things down to get free goods.
- icebraining 13y ago
  All delivery technologies result in injuries. That doesn't make them "not good ideas".
- awj 13y ago
  So your "worst case scenario" includes a complete lack of reasonable safety precautions that the FAA would mandate before this is approved AND damage inflicted by something with 8x the wingspan (not to mention differences in engine power)? You believe this is a reasonable comparison? We could build UPS trucks that are two lanes wide and paint over their windshields, but we don't. Because that would be stupid. So stupid that comparing the risk involved isn't even worthy of discussion.
cdash 13y ago
So your point is that it won't decapitate someone and instead slice their body/face to pieces?

bigtunacan 13y ago

Not negativity for the sake of negativity. While the link I posted is a large single rotor helicopter, I was trying to show a worst case scenario. If Amazon Air does get off the ground then I would imagine the program expanding to delivering heavier packages over time, which would require larger quad copters and thus larger rotors and higher risk of more serious injuries. I have built and fly hobby planes and copters in my spare time. They are dangerous. Once, after one of my planes crashed near me, I picked it up without giving it a second thought and sliced my hand wide open on the still spinning front propeller. I don't necessarily believe this is a technology that will result in fatalities, but certainly injuries, especially to children and animals. On a less dangerous note; I fully expect some shenanigans from people shooting these things down to get free goods.

icebraining 13y ago
All delivery technologies result in injuries. That doesn't make them "not good ideas".
awj 13y ago
So your "worst case scenario" includes a complete lack of reasonable safety precautions that the FAA would mandate before this is approved AND damage inflicted by something with 8x the wingspan (not to mention differences in engine power)? You believe this is a reasonable comparison? We could build UPS trucks that are two lanes wide and paint over their windshields, but we don't. Because that would be stupid. So stupid that comparing the risk involved isn't even worthy of discussion.

cdash 13y ago

So your point is that it won't decapitate someone and instead slice their body/face to pieces?