I've heard people bemoaning the fact that we were promised flying cars, but they haven't been delivered yet. But apparently they have:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRZNLBL7Px4
I'm sure none of us can afford any of these, but they may become less expensive over time.
The problem I have with these pie-in-the-sky promises of flying cars is that they promise to unclog the roads and be wonderful in all these ways, when the infrastructure we have for flight (ATCs and runways) are in very short supply even with the air traffic we have now, let alone with millions of flying cars to keep track of. Most people, I found, are most suited for 2D thinking.
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on January 04, 2018, 10:47:04 AM
The problem I have with these pie-in-the-sky promises of flying cars is that they promise to unclog the roads and be wonderful in all these ways, when the infrastructure we have for flight (ATCs and runways) are in very short supply even with the air traffic we have now, let alone with millions of flying cars to keep track of. Most people, I found, are most suited for 2D thinking.
Plus the whole engine failure = fiery crash thing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hGjl3zcJMk
Flying cars seems like a real-life version of the 'awesome but impractical' trope.
Well of course Yamashita wouldn't admit to having a secret lab - it's a secret, for crying out loud!
Yeah, the Jetsons were real, way back in 1960 ....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0S3Jf-NxdI
Even earlier ... notice the man-lift he uses to leave work ... I have used those, they are nearly fatal (no safety belt).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8pvcGWtXXE
Flying cars? I think they are called airplanes. The French already make a bus that flies. It's called the Airbus. Boeing tries to compete, but they don't have a cool name for their bus. They just call it a Boeing, so people don't really know what it is. Me? I'd be happy to have a car that just bumps up and down. People are always impressed when your car bumps up and down while it's not going anywhere. They all ooh and aah over it. I think that would be cool.
Antigrav cars would be pretty sweet. Cars that skim the surface of the Earth without actually touching it. That would really help out with the expense of tires and road maintenance. Though I'm not sure how braking would work...
Here are some cars that don't all fly, but they're pretty damned cool anyway (a couple already seen in prior vid):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_D3_-nSkvzE
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on January 04, 2018, 10:47:04 AM
The problem I have with these pie-in-the-sky promises of flying cars is that they promise to unclog the roads and be wonderful in all these ways, when the infrastructure we have for flight (ATCs and runways) are in very short supply even with the air traffic we have now, let alone with millions of flying cars to keep track of. Most people, I found, are most suited for 2D thinking.
I don't think there will ever be millions of flying cars anyway, since they likely will only be affordable by the super wealthy.
Quote from: Unbeliever on January 04, 2018, 02:19:55 PM
I don't think there will ever be millions of flying cars anyway, since they likely will only be affordable by the super wealthy.
If the middle class could afford them, Air Traffic Control would be a nightmare.
Quote from: SGOS on January 05, 2018, 12:10:28 PM
If the middle class could afford them, Air Traffic Control would be a nightmare.
Actually, air traffic control would be of almost no relevance if and
only if flying cars operate as self-driving. That way every vehicle is obeying the same rules and "knows" that every other vehicle will respond in a programmatic and predictable way. The car automatically "knows" that X other cars are within a certain distance, and they would algorithmically "negotiate" a best way safely past each other. You can have certain rules that all vehicles follow -- never be within Y meters of another vehicle; never be in airspaces A, B or C; cross this space only at these times and/or these altitudes -- and then more flexible rules that are situation dependent. If takeoffs and landings can be automated, air traffic control would hardly need to be bothered.
Then, of course, you have the problem of network failure, in addition to mechanical failure, but a sufficiently redundant system would handle most of the network issue, and a failsafe parachute that triggers automatically on a system fault or unacceptable descent rate would take care of most vehicle failures. Nothing's perfect, but that would minimize the dangers.
I don't think the technology exists for this to work
yet, but I think it
can exist eventually. Alas, probably not within my own lifetime, but I could be pleasantly surprised.
Quote from: Hydra009 on January 04, 2018, 01:11:55 PM
Plus the whole engine failure = fiery crash thing.
Engine failure will be an extremely minor factor in total deaths. Just like the earth bound cars we have today, most fatalities will due to the shortcomings of the person at the controls and nothing more.
So just like earth bound cars, the only way this will work with any kind of acceptable safety record is if the vehicles operate themselves and the only interaction people are allowed to have with them is in telling the vehicle where they want to go.
Quote from: Johan on January 06, 2018, 01:26:56 PM
Engine failure will be an extremely minor factor in total deaths. Just like the earth bound cars we have today, most fatalities will due to the shortcomings of the person at the controls and nothing more.
So just like earth bound cars, the only way this will work with any kind of acceptable safety record is if the vehicles operate themselves and the only interaction people are allowed to have with them is in telling the vehicle where they want to go.
The flying cars (autonomous I presume) will be safer. And I wont get in one.