Airbus Details Plan To Build Flying Taxis (autoblog.com)

CityAirbus is a new program from Airbus that aims to put commuters in the air to combat overcrowded cities. It sounds a lot like an airborne Uber, writes Brandon Turkus from Autoblog: "Passengers can use an app to book passage, head to their local helipad, climb aboard with a number of other passengers, and in the words of Airbus are 'whisked away to their destination.' Each ride would cost 'nearly the equivalent of a normal taxi ride for each passenger.' Beyond the advantages of avoiding traffic, Airbus claims its new conveyance will be faster, more sustainable, and, obviously, more exciting. Initially, the program would rely on a human pilot, but as with nearly every mode of modern transport, there would eventually be an autonomous version." The company has no timeline for when CityAirbuses will be ready for flight. They did note that the autonomous functionality will be the biggest challenge. "No country in the world today allows drones without remote pilots to fly over cities -- with or without passengers," writes Bruno Trabel from Airbus Helicopters. He leads the Skyways project, "which aims to help evolve current regulatory constraints." Project Vahana, a similar project that consists of an electric-powered, autonomous helicopter used for personal and cargo flights, will be tested in late 2017.

Comments

Sorry, the FAA says no.

[gavron]

The FAA has already said no to ridesharing. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/...

The FAA has already said no to "Uber in the sky". http://motherboard.vice.com/re...
And http://marginalrevolution.com/...
And https://fee.org/articles/how-t...

The reason for it is that the FAA has different rules for carrying yourself as a private pilot, carrying others for commercial gain, fare-sharing, etc. The regulations for fare-sharing mean you actually ALL have to be going TO GO DO the same thing, not just going to the same place. https://www.tnooz.com/article/...

The FAA has a higher requirement of pilots, equipment, and maintenance when used to carry passengers (other than private pilots who are NOT getting reimbursed).

Ehud
OB DISC: I'm an FAA certificated commercial helicopter pilot

Re:Uh-huh

[bruce_the_loon]

Bell 206 BIII chopper, pilot plus 4 passengers with a Rolls Royce Allison turbine engine. According to the specs, it can take 4 passengers 100 miles in 50 minutes at a fuel usage of around 40 gallons.

Compare that to a VW Bluemotion with a claimed efficiency of 60 mpg, and a probable real world traffic efficiency of 45 mpg. So real world 100 mile journey would be say 2.2 gallons and a 110 minute journey. If each passenger in the chopper did the journey seperately, then you're still only looking at 10 gallons of fuel compared to the 40 gallons for the Bell.

And that doesn't take into account the capital cost of a $400000 chopper versus a $40000 car.