Slashdot Mirror


NYT On Flying Cars

This week's NYT magazine has a lengthy piece on the holy grail of modern technology, the flying car. It's a very interesting history of the numerous inventors that have spent a lot of time working on their dreams - Moller, who's been mentioned on Slashdot several times, as well as several early pioneers who achieved Darwin awards. The time frame before you'll be able to buy a flying car is, as always, five years.

30 of 240 comments (clear)

  1. My Car by xombo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've had a flying car for years, I just have to go really fast and find a sufficient ramp. It'll fly. But seriously though, why not just go buy a plane or a helicopter? It's not like you'll get some fuel, speed, or convenience advantage just because its a "car" because it's still just a plane in car skin.
    "Personal Flight Devices" on the other hand could be interesting. The Rocketeer anyone?

  2. Without reading the article... by Chess_the_cat · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Are flying cars really that great of an idea? Sounds to me like a bureaucrat's nightmare. There'll be licenses, tests, laws, regulations. You can't fly too low, too high, too fast, over certain areas. You have to be under a certain weight, have a good medical history, good vision. Imagine a fender bender at 150 feet. Does your car fall to the ground? They'll want parachutes, airbags, harnesses.

    And yes, there is this kind of regulation for the airlines today but they only have to regulate the few licensed carriers and a relatively small number of private pilots. Imagine 100 million "motorists" flying around in flying cars. lol. It'll never happen.

    If it's your dream to fly forget about flying cars and get your pilot's license.

    --
    Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
    1. Re:Without reading the article... by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You have to be under a certain weight...

      What, only skinny people can fly them? What are you, a SouthWest employee or something?

      Anyhow, with the terrorist problems, I doubt flying cars will ever happen.

    2. Re:Without reading the article... by MrLint · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Well, a number of things can be addressed by technology.

      Researchers are already working on driverless control systems, so much like a planes autopilot, you just watch most of the time. This system will be 100% necessary in a flying car as most ppl wont be able to be pilots (more on this later), and not to mention the clear need to protect farmers' markets from inadvertent ballistic objects. This is more than 5 years away for ground cars, aircars, much more so.

      Secondly you are going to need a radically new lifting and propulsion technology. Fans, jets, and propellers just aint gonna cut it. Besides with cars flying thru the air even at 55mph you couldnt stop/maneuver fast enough if there were a problem with current technology. The only real answer here is science fiction. So we are going to be waiting for a while.

      Of course with flying cars the airlines will go totally bankrupt, which is probably just as well.

      Security becomes a nightmare. the borders of every country would need to have an override system to force all cars into approved entry points. This of course is also a fools errand as anyone intent on doing something would just override the in car control system.

      Why do I feel like Im sketching out a Larry Niven short story?

    3. Re:Without reading the article... by mule007 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      And if you're a teen in Canada, join the Air Cadets program and get free pilot training/licensing. Now in my 20s I really really wish I had done this, it would be so cool.
      I was in Air Cadets and was one of the lucky few selected to get both my glider licence and my private pilot licence. It was an excellent program. I had both licences by the time I was 17 (I could fly before I could drive), and not only did it not cost me a cent to get the licences, they paid me a training bonus while I was on course.

      The concept of the general population taking to the skies frightens me. There are way too many people on the roads today who I think are accidents waiting to happen and should have to take some kind of mandatory driver retraining. I think I would opt to walk to my destination rather than be within 2 miles of them in the sky. If/when flying cars do become a reality, it better be as close to 100% computer controlled as is realistically possible.
    4. Re:Without reading the article... by MrLint · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ahem, So the article says :

      One beneficiary of computerized navigation is national security: thanks to G.P.S. and cellphone technology, flying cars could be tracked more easily than any road vehicle. NASA is already at work on a device that will function as an on-board air-traffic controller, and the agency expects to have it ready in time for the debut of its first flying car, the EQuiPT, or Easy Quiet Personal Transport. (NASA prefers the term ''personal air vehicle'' to ''flying car.'') The vehicle will automatically broadcast information on its location, so ground monitors and every other aircraft in the sky will know exactly who and where you are. (Any rogue vehicle ought to be easily spotted; another driver who sees a car that is in the air but not on his monitor can be expected to sound the alarm.)

      Lets look at this further, Ok so they can track them, its doesn't state that it can control them remotely, however a reasonable person would have to assume that you would have to. it also doesn't address turing off the transponder/gps what have you by someone determined. If we make the assumption (also not exactly in the article) that the unit is aerodynamically unstable (like the stealth fighter) and cannot be flown without computer control, then you wont be able to get it off the ground manually.

      On top of this just a few weeks ago NPR had an article about computer controlled ground cars. Those systems are current setup to leave a space between cars of 100 feet. Clearly insufficient for actual metropolitan driving conditions. While they are still working on getting this control system to work in the conditions that would occur in the busiest cities, i take great pause to think that :

      A) If a driverless control system isn't ready to be used on normal cars its still going to be a ways off for air cars.

      B) That there is will the concern of overriding the system, and if one had an aircar full of explosives, is air traffic control going to be able to put it somewhere 'safe' in the 2 seconds it'll take to make a left turn into the side of a building? But how about we revisit this *after* the first aircar crashes into a building

  3. holy grail? hardly. by gl4ss · · Score: 3, Insightful

    helicopter.

    ultralights(if you're into cheap).

    kit-planes.

    one-of-those-paragliders-with-an-engine.

    balloons.

    if you want to fly there's "affordable" solutions already, none of them solve the problem of how you could use a flying device (that makes a shitload of noise) usefully in a city though, without there being some serious magic in controlling it(computers, computers..).

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    1. Re:holy grail? hardly. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, a basic to any approach to a mass-produced flying car is that there will be some serious magic in the controllers. I imagine it would take some major smarts on both the car and a ground-based network of some kind. You can't tell Mr. Commuter that he needs to get a pilot's license just to fly to work every day. The idea is to get into your flying car, tell it where you want to go (it will probably already know: "Would you like to stop at Dunkin' Donuts on the way in, Mr. Smith?") and let the car wake you from your nap when you've arrived. Flying, as such, isn't the issue: practical commuting is. If you can get a significant percentage of people that currently commute on today's congested expressways to be able to fly to work, you've solved a lot of problems. Made a few more, no doubt, but solved a lot.

      As for me ... if this ever comes to pass you'll still find me on the ground, on the open highway, during what used to be rush hour.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:holy grail? hardly. by CmdrGravy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree, cities right now simply aren't designed to accommodate millions of flying vehicles and nor is the general transport infrastructure. I think even if flying cars did become as affordable normal cars and could be maintained and driven as easily as normal cars it would still take an awfully long time to rebuild the infrastructure around them.

      I really think that at the moment they are a solution in search of a problem. If the problem is that people would like to be able to travel more quickly and easily between locations then investment in mass public transport would provide a far better solution.

      For example a system whereby you could get in the lift from your apartment to a high speed underground which could take you anywhere in the city or to intercity jump off points for more trains, planes or boats out of town and which was very quick, with hardly any waiting around between connections, comfortable and safe would be a much better idea than flying cars.

      Obviously this is more expensive in the short term than letting people spend there money on cool flying cars but in the long term once the environmental, air, noise pollution etc was factored in I suspect proper investment and planning in infrastructure would pay off in spades.

  4. Trains by Schemat1c · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sure, flying cars would be very cool. But it would make more sense if we focused on a nationwide mag-lev train system. It would be close to the speed of planes and no worries of it falling out of the sky into neighborhoods and schoolyards. You could rent cars that go to and from the stations to get you to your specific destination.

    Besides if flying cars ever become a reality, they will just be toys of the wealthy. Just as private airplanes are now.

    --

    "Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everybody agrees that it is old enough to know better." - Unknown
  5. Flying car will always be available, tomorrow by UncleJam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Flying cars will only be there because somebody just wanted to "do it". They won't be pratical. What will they accomplish that the automobile won't? Sure, they look good to somebody that looks up to the open sky, but if everyone had one, you wouldn't be flying "as the crow" everywhere. Rules of the air will be created (They're already there for the larger planes, less restrictive to smaller ones). Jumbo jets must stay on little sky highways to the destinations, and if you've ever seen those maps where the position of every plane in the US is shown, you'll know what I am talking about. Thus the benefit of them over cars will be nullfied. Sure, they'd be pretty cool, but light planes already exist ;)

    Also, what about terrorism? Not to be a fearmonger, a group could get maybe 20 of these if they are plentiful, and just crash one after another into the White House, something you can't exactly do with cars. Plus, people fall asleep in cars enough, I can't imagine trying to pilot a car/plane unconciously.

    1. Re:Flying car will always be available, tomorrow by Coryoth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Flying cars will only be there because somebody just wanted to "do it". They won't be pratical. What will they accomplish that the automobile won't? Sure, they look good to somebody that looks up to the open sky, but if everyone had one, you wouldn't be flying "as the crow" everywhere. Rules of the air will be created (They're already there for the larger planes, less restrictive to smaller ones).

      You're not well acquainted with 2D vs. 3D packing problems are you? Even if you are restricted to "air highways" you will still be greatly reducing traffic congenstion by packing in a 3D volume instead of a 2D road.

      The there's routing - with the current roading scheme annoying things like buildings and general housing get in your way. With skyways as long as the basic altitude is high enough you'll be quickly eliminating most of those problems. Of course, if you think about it, that greatly eases the issue intersections too - there's not really a need for anywhere near as many because you can layer roads vertically - they don't need to cross at the same point (again we're into fun properties of 3-Space vs. 2-Space). Basicxally everything is automatically a freeway system with exits wherever needed - no construction efforts required.

      Jedidiah.

  6. Not much new by geneing · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I live just a few blocks away from Moller's company. There isn't much going on there nowadays.

    When they used to do testing on the car prototype the noise was pretty loud. So, I don't know if people would stand dozens of these cars flying around.

    You have to admire the tenacity though, spending 40 years on one idea.

  7. Joe Pilot? by CodeBuster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The pilot of an aerial vehicle, be it a small single engine propeller plane, a four engine jet liner, or even a flying car must demonstrate that he is able to handle three dimensional spacial reasoning, emergency situations, and vast number of dials, meters, switches, and settings. Some of the proposed flying car concepts demonstrate helicopter like flight dynamics which mean that they would be even more difficult to fly. Most of the people driving vehicles on our roads right now are barely competent enough to handle forward, reverse, left, and right, so why should we hand them the keys to fa lying vehicle when they can barely handle the automobile that they already own? Piloting was and still is a skilled profession which should be hanlded by qualified licensed pilots. I do not forsee this changing any time soon.

  8. Controls by b0lt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The controls of a flying car would probably be difficult to use, compared to regular cars, since there is another axis of movement. Unless the car only goes up when you press the accelerator pedal, it would seem that getting accustomed to it would be fairly difficult. Not to mention the crashes you could have

    --
    got sig?
  9. Just great by ShatteredDream · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The last thing we need is to give the average driver the ability to pull stupid moves in the air. If the idea of flying cars doesn't make you cringe, just imagine the average SUV drive cutting you off 50-100 ft off the ground. Yeah, that's all we need. Car accidents that happen several hundred feet in the air and cause cars to come crashing down on top of people's houses and businesses....

  10. did not RTFA either but by Risto · · Score: 2, Insightful

    b4 you can have flying cars
    You need
    - freeflight - no flight corridors
    - autopilot for cars
    - automatic collision avoidance
    - some tanks can do this now
    - driverless vehicles that follow a map

    bottom line
    the flying car needs to be able to fly itself
    and have a parachute in case of stalls

  11. Not in this lifetime :] by Flamefly · · Score: 3, Insightful
    For the whole flying car tech to covert the world you need some tech that can keep a tonne or two up in the air for an extended period of time (that doesn't churn out mega pollution).

    You also need totally automatic handling, no manual control at all, the user should only need to type in the post/zipcode and voila the car will take the best route. Thats a rather large challenge when we can't even contemplate doing the same (in commerical terms) of self driving cars on the ground.

    Safety, either the mechanics behind the vehicle need to be unerring, or some method to prevent the car from just splatting on the ground, wouldn't really help the marketing campaign.

    The only way any of this will pan out is if we develop a tech similar to fifth element antigrav cars. Props (even protected) / jets are just unfeasible, too complicated for your average joe to keep running. The problem is when people think of flying cars we think of these cars metres from each other floating majestically, we dont imagine cars flying along at 300mph 2 miles no fly around them, unable to fly over populated areas and generating a hellova lot of noise and spewing forth pollution comparable to a few SUV's

    Oh and it needs to be comparible cost to the current generation of cars...

    I'll stick with my bike...

  12. Flying Car: Completely Impractical by reporter · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Let's tally what we have seen on Slashdot in the last week.

    1. flying car
    2. hydrogen-powered car
    3. solar-powered locomotion

    #1 and #3 tickle the fanciful mind, but only #2 is practical.

    Even if we could build a flying car economically, how would we regulate it? Imagine everyone replacing their regular car with a flying car. How could we draw the "lanes" in air? Who has the right of way? What is the speed limit?

    The flying car would likely be a hazard as all sorts of nuts zip zag across the atmosphere, crashing into each other and killing each other in head-on collisions.

  13. Re:the holy grail ? One Word by Graemee · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Anti-gravity

    OK, One hypenated word.

  14. Holy Grail my butt by WindowlessView · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This just sucks energy and resources from the One True Way: Teleportation!

    --
    Leave the gun, take the cannolis.
  15. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  16. "Darwin Awards" editorial comment by Raindance · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think I know what the editor was trying to say by commenting that several of these inventors have "achieved Darwin Awards" but... c'mon, it's the wrong usage of the term.

    Far from removing the bad from the gene pool, the deaths of the people who've tried this and failed (well, *really* failed) have removed physicists who were inventive enough to try something new, were financially successful enough to purchase the needed equipment, and cared enough to try it. Maybe their *idea* achieved a Darwin Award but, people like these?

    I'd suggest just using "died" next time if in doubt.

    1. Re:"Darwin Awards" editorial comment by justins · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I think I know what the editor was trying to say by commenting that several of these inventors have "achieved Darwin Awards" but... c'mon, it's the wrong usage of the term.

      Far from removing the bad from the gene pool, the deaths of the people who've tried this and failed (well, *really* failed) have removed physicists who were inventive enough to try something new, were financially successful enough to purchase the needed equipment, and cared enough to try it. Maybe their *idea* achieved a Darwin Award but, people like these?

      Being virtuous or smart are not necessarily survival traits.
      --
      Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
  17. Re:Flying Car: Completely Impractical by asreal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't think the personal flying car will ever be practical or affordable, but I think there are some applications for merging flight with city traffic. First, flying police cars as mentioned in the article. Second, how about flying transit? How much more popular would mass transit be if you could zip over the heads of car-driving motorists stuck in traffic at 450km/hr, making it to the depot at the grocery store or near your work in record time?

    I'm really glad some people are exploring it. Hydrogen-powered flying transit, anyone?

  18. Re:the holy grail ? One Word by peculiarmethod · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Every time I hear someone rant about anti-gravity.. my brain starts churning overtime about what we're not considering when we think anti-gravity. This would probably mean counter-acting gravitons.. or gravity waves.. if this is the case, then we will most likely have an understanding of not only how to counteract gravity.. but how to create local gravity as well. This would make space travel as open as the highways we drive on now.. fast food and gas stations included. While anti gravity is cool, and will do wonders on planets.. there is MUCH more space in.. space.. and so, controlling GRAVITY is the real holy grail. Anti-gravity is just like the mastering of electrical current. Gravity control is like setting those currents into small chips, and building devices not considered in the first place. anywho..

    --
    ** "It's not my job to stand between the people talking to me, and the ones listening to me." -- Pego the Jerk
  19. Flying cars would change the world by BufferArea · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Many peope are asking what's the point? You only have to think about the repercussions of flying cars to see the point.

    First, imagine what now happens to our transportation infrastructure. After the initial investment into the network for flying cars, the costs for the transportaion infrastrcuture would come down incredibly. We would either have no cost in maintaining roads or a substantially reduced cost - depending on whether it is economical to have semi's hover over the roads. The cost wouldn't go to zero, of course, since we still have to have computers and people to manage those computers to monitor the skies and traffic.

    Second, imagine your job opporunities now. I travel an hour each way for my job now. It's about 60 miles each way. With a flying car that does over 300 mph, my possible job radius increases by 5 times! That means the total area I can look for jobs increases by 25 times! Additionally, if flying can be automated, it might be possible to extend this. If I can sleep during most of the trip, I can expand my job to home radius even more.

    Third, this would just about eliminate passenger air travel within most continents. Even though air planes can travel faster that the roughly 350 mph being quoted for the flying cars, the associated over-head (checking-in, having to work on the air-lines schedule, etc...) would mostly or completely negate that advantage.

    Next, imagine the effects upon retail businesses. Since people can now go over 5x as far in the same amount of time as with convential cars (perhaps even farther since traffic may be much more manageable), retail businesses have to be much more comptetitve. Instead of just competing with places within, say your city , you're now competing with businesses that are 300 miles away. You may have to compete with businesses from several cities! If you travel at over 300 mph, now stores up to 75 miles away can be considered the "neighborhood corner store".

    Now consider the effect upon real-estate prices. Except for small islands with a dense population, it would be very hard to drive up real-estate prices based solely on proximity to areas containing many jobs. People won't mind living 100 miles away from work when it only takes them about 20 minutes for the commute. Thus the demand for property next to areas containing many jobs would severely decrease.

    Because of all these effects, we could eventually see the population spread out more evenly thoughout the contintents instead oh having much of the land empty with a few areas densely populated (we would still have still have densely populated areas -just not as many and much less dense). This would also likely have a significant impact upon the environment-whether good or bad I can't say.

    Lastly, because the population would be more spread out, it would force the communications infrastructure to expand to meet the new demands.

    If a flying car with decent range and speed is made available at an affordable price to most people-it won't be an evolutionary step of the autombile-it'll be a revolution for the world.

    1. Re:Flying cars would change the world by ohmypolarbear · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Because of all these effects, we could eventually see the population spread out more evenly thoughout the contintents instead oh having much of the land empty with a few areas densely populated (we would still have still have densely populated areas -just not as many and much less dense).
      Most of that "empty" land you're talking about isn't empty at all - it's being put to use already, making the food that you buy at your friendly neigborhood UltraMegaGroceryMarket. Before a serious shift away from the current urban/rural paradigm can be made, somebody is going to have to figure out some clever way to feed everyone who's suddenly decided they want to move away from the cities.
  20. Re:the holy grail ? One Word by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Given sufficiently high-resolution control over gravity you can accomplish basically any engineering task. It should even allow us to control all forms of matter. The limits will then be the efficiency of the process and the amount of energy you can generate to run it. Of course, right now the limit is our understanding of gravity...

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  21. Five years??? by SnappingTurtle · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm glad Slashdot is so optimistic that I'll be able to buy a flying car in five years. The way my career is going, I won't even be able to afford a non-flying car in five years.

    --
    I've found that my posts don't format quite right w/o a sig.