6 ms·
It's nice to see that not all of the claims made that turned out to be false were in the negative. e.g: Automobiles will start to decline almost as soon as th
by mytochar 12y ago
It's nice to see that not all of the claims made that turned out to be false were in the negative.
e.g:
Automobiles will start to decline almost as soon as the last shot is fired in World War II. The name of Igor Sikorsky will be as well known as Henry Ford's, for his helicopter will all but replace the horseless carriage as the new means of popular transportation. Instead of a car in every garage, there will be a helicopter.... These 'copters' will be so safe and will cost so little to produce that small models will be made for teenage youngsters. These tiny 'copters, when school lets out, will fill the sky as the bicycles of our youth filled the prewar roads. - Harry Bruno, aviation publicist, 1943.
Furthermore, I notice that's by an aviation publicist; and that just happens to lend to my other comment / question:
How many of these people were paid to have the stance that they had?
- MichaelGG 12y agoIsn't the big miss there that they turned out not to be that cheap, nor that safe? Living in a city with bad traffic, I'd love to get a small copter.
- vladiliescu 12y agoBut if everybody else had a small copter too, wouldn't the air traffic be just as bad?
- kardos 12y agoNot really, because you have another dimension to expand into, so you can imagine adding as many levels as you need. Also you avoid all the obstacles that cars have to navigate at ground level (rivers, buildings, trees, etc). On the other hand, there's some work to be done to define good copter "rules of the road". A simple solution is to say you can only go north at lvl1, east at lvl2, south lvl3, west lvl4. That would pretty much eliminate lateral collisions, so then you've only got level changes and takeoffs/landings to solve and it's done. On the other other hand, there are bad drivers, there'll surely be bad pilots. Perhaps self-driving copters is the answer!
- PakG1 12y agoGiven that airports require air traffic control to coordinate all the takeoffs and landings of airplanes, and the number of airplanes would no doubt be much smaller than the number of helicopters that would fly in a similar physical area at mass scale if helicopters replaced cars... I don't know how much the increased dimensions would really help. Airplanes trying to make their own decisions at airports would be disastrous, even if all the pilots agreed on what constituted right of way.
- jacquesm 12y agoBirds (in spite of, or rather because of their birdbrains) seem to be doing ok at this.
- mkeener 12y agoI think birds fare about as well as an aircraft when striking other aircraft. Doesn't really seem comparable.
- jacquesm 12y agoThey fare infinitely better. Imagine the kind of traffic that you see around a large tree at dusk that birds use for sleeping around a major airport. The carnage would be beyond your wildest nightmares.
- mkeener 12y agoI think I didn't communicate clearly. What I meant to say is that I think birds fare as well when birds strike aircraft (jets, helicopters) as when aircraft strike other aircraft. There's a measurable difference between a 200g soft thing bumping into another one, as opposed to a multi-ton rigid structure full of high explosive liquid and fast moving things having a little tiff. I get what your saying about the organized chaos, but the risk slight accidental impact imposes isn't even close. Would be awesome, though, gotta say.
- mattlutze 12y agoAnd also unsafe. I'd rather not have to navigate the friendly skies knowing a distracted driver is climbing too fast and is going to crash into me, or is texting and nudges the stick and crashes into me, or falls asleep and...
- agumonkey 12y agoNothing in air will ever take off (sic) because of the potential energy involved. It's not passive enough.