Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Dubai Starts Tests in Bid To Become First City With Flying Taxis (reuters.com)

Posted by msmash on from the to-the-future dept.

Dubai staged a test flight on Monday for what it said would soon be the world's first drone taxi service under an ambitious plan by the United Arab Emirates city to lead the Arab world in innovation. From a report: The flying taxi developed by German drone firm Volocopter resembles a small, two-seater helicopter cabin topped by a wide hoop studded with 18 propellers. It was unmanned for its maiden test run in a ceremony arranged for Dubai Crown Prince Sheikh Hamdan bin Mohammed. Meant to fly without remote control guidance and with a maximum flight duration of 30 minutes, it comes with plenty of fail-safes in case of trouble: back-up batteries, rotors and, for a worst case scenario, a couple of parachutes.

63 comments

  1. Groan... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 2

    Sure, it's something to think about because if we don't start down that road of development now we won't be ready when the technology actually supports it. But right now and for the near future, the technology DOES NOT support it.

    Stories like this that imply WE'LL HAVE FLYING CARS IN FIVE YEARS are just stupid and a waste of time to read.

    Though I don't doubt that the rich fuckers in Dubai may be the first to be able to afford it...

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:Groan... by stabiesoft · · Score: 1

      So given the choice between autonomous taxis and flying taxis, I am guessing you are going with cars. I'm thinking flying taxis. It fixes the primary problem (at least in the US) which is the government failing to build new roads.

    2. Re: Groan... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've never watched The Jetson's, I take it.

    3. Re:Groan... by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      One way to look at it is that the rich... um, people in Dubai are ironing out the bugs in the technology for us.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    4. Re:Groan... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I'm going with: 'Start business building bunker like, flying taxi proof, houses for richers.'

      Of course we'll have the 'crete delivered in flying autonomous trucks. That's just obvious. Forgone conclusion.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    5. Re:Groan... by BoogieChile · · Score: 1

      How about autonomous flying taxis?

    6. Re:Groan... by crunchygranola · · Score: 3

      The technology is apparently here to support this vehicle.

      Which costs $350,000 and can carry 160 kg a maximum distance of 27 km at 50 km/h (that is 350 lb, 17 miles, and 42 MPH to those using pre-1795 measuring systems) and takes 2 hours to fully charge.

      With a charge time:flight time ratio of 2:1 you could get in 8 hours of flight a day, around the clock, or about 400 km total travel distance. If used as a short range shuttle over a congested city center you might get in up to forty 10 km trips a day, maybe ~10,000 in a year. Looks like this could be a profitable service with a not-astronomical fare price.

      --
      Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
    7. Re: Groan... by rylyeh · · Score: 1

      Amazing to me that the Jetsons are still the gold standard in futurism!

      --
      Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
    8. Re:Groan... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      First crash it's done forever, lawsuits will bankrupt the company, and it will set flying taxis back by 50 years. Blade Runner I will never happen. Fuck these morons for trying to move too quickly.

    9. Re:Groan... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      First crash it's done forever, lawsuits will bankrupt the company

      People said the same about Tesla Autopilot. Then it killed a few people. The world continued to turn, and Tesla owners continue to use Autopilot. People are tolerant of a few deaths if they can see that the overall system is generally safe.

      Nobody expects perfect safety from a flying taxi. If it is as safe as a normal taxi, then that is good enough.

    10. Re:Groan... by crunchygranola · · Score: 1

      First crash it's done forever, lawsuits will bankrupt the company, and it will set flying taxis back by 50 years. Blade Runner I will never happen. Fuck these morons for trying to move too quickly.

      These don't crash so easily. They have multiple redundancy in the rotor array, the craft itself is self-flying - the "pilot" just guides it where to go, and it does have that aircraft safety parachute if everything fails to bring the craft to the ground in a not-catastrophic manner.

      --
      Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
    11. Re:Groan... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      can carry 160 kg

      Wouldn't fly in the USA. Literally. It's barely enough for 1 average American high schooler.

    12. Re:Groan... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The difference is that Tesla is a cult; people are willing to forgive pretty much anything and actually buy those DRM cars.

    13. Re:Groan... by parkinglot777 · · Score: 1

      The technology is apparently here to support this vehicle.

      Which costs $350,000 ...

      Which is a disposable change for royal family of Dubai. In other words, they don't care for the cost. What they may care is that they get a new toy that most (if not all) people in the world don't have/get (yet).

    14. Re: Groan... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of peoples idea of science fiction is Star Trek and Star Wars.
      They never bothered looking at any realistic futurism when they grew up so their idea of a flying car is limited to what the cartoons showed them.
      Googling for "futurism flying car" or even "retrofuturism flying car" will give you heaps of images of small aircrafts with obvious propulsion systems, yet people are stuck on the one that works through cartoon magic.

    15. Re:Groan... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The difference is that Tesla is a cult

      Wait? You think flying cars doesn't have a cult following?

  2. First thing: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Reprogram your systems so they won't hit tall buildings

    1. Re:First thing: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reprogram your systems so they won't hit tall buildings

      Not an issue when the buildings have a habit of catching fire all by themselves.

    2. Re:First thing: by sit1963nz · · Score: 1

      Ever think they may have been a first attempt at landing lights ?

    3. Re:First thing: by Maritz · · Score: 1

      You're thinking of the Saudis. You know, those other oil-funded tyrant barbarian scumbags.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    4. Re:First thing: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your description also matches the USA.

  3. Too Much Safety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Skip the parachutes. I'm sure someone will use them for fun and some idiot will use them when they get frightened over nothing. Keep the doors locked while in flight to prevent people from tossing things outside.

    1. Re:Too Much Safety by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking the parachutes automatically deploy, or not. No human intervention.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    2. Re:Too Much Safety by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking the parachutes automatically deploy, or not. .

      It's a helicopter, so it can auto-rotate to slow the descent.

    3. Re:Too Much Safety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could be wrong, but doesn't auto rotation work best with one large rotor rather than lots of smaller ones?

      Also, autorotation requires a special clutch between the motor and the rotor that allows the blades to rotate independently of the motor.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autorotation

    4. Re:Too Much Safety by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you beat me to it. Multiple-blade copters tend to drop like a brick when the blades stop turning. Not enough inertia in the blades, maybe.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  4. Re:Muslim technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or Russia. Blessed be all Russians for they ganged up on Our Supreme Lord, Hillary Clinton, and literally walked in and STOLE the election and handed it to their cronie that they bought off with KGB Roubles, Donald James TRUMP.

  5. Re: Muslim technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Moron. #CrookedHillary lost on her own evil deeds.

  6. Here is an idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The drone hooks onto the waistband of your underpants and then carries you to your destination.

    1. Re:Here is an idea... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Sure to be funded. High 8 figure initial round, no prototype required. Arm wave, a smile and a pretty picture. KChing.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Here is an idea... by crunchygranola · · Score: 1

      The SkyWedgie!

      --
      Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
  7. No, There Aren't "A Couple of Parachutes" by crunchygranola · · Score: 1

    There is however an (optional) full aircraft parachute that brings the entire vehicle to the ground. This is called a "ballistic total separation system". I am puzzled though about what gets "separated" here. Ejecting any part of the vehicle is going to be a problem for people on the ground.

    --
    Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
    1. Re:No, There Aren't "A Couple of Parachutes" by mykro76 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ejecting any part of the vehicle is going to be a problem for people on the ground.

      I suppose that won't really matter if the only people on the ground are the worker classes.

    2. Re:No, There Aren't "A Couple of Parachutes" by scdeimos · · Score: 4, Funny

      I am puzzled though about what gets "separated" here.

      The rotor heads are attached to the parachute so that they land safely to be reused on the next taxi. i.e.: the passenger compartment falls to the ground and erupts in a Li-Poly fireball.

    3. Re:No, There Aren't "A Couple of Parachutes" by scdeimos · · Score: 1

      I haven't found any diagrams or pictures of a Volocopter parachute deployment, however:

      • According to the specifications (https://www.volocopter.com/assets/pdf/2017_04_Design_specifications_2X.pdf) it's just labelled as a "full aircraft emergency parachute."
      • The overhead picture on this 2013 article shows a hump on top of the craft that is probably the stowed parachute - but this hump isn't present on the models being demonstrated in Dubai at the moment.
    4. Re:No, There Aren't "A Couple of Parachutes" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It means the parachute is "totally separated" from the aircraft. This is achieved via a rocket powered charge that fires upwards, separating the chute from the craft, and increasing the chance that the chute will open before the craft hits the ground. They are definitely the preferred choice for low flying aircraft. You can learn more about them by watching Peter Sripol build his own ultralight from foam board: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7yF9tV4xWEMZkel7q8La_w/videos

    5. Re:No, There Aren't "A Couple of Parachutes" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. It wouldn't even make sense to put passenger parachutes in. It is completely unreasonable to think that a regular, untrained person would even have time (not to mention courage and presence of mind) to find the parachute, grab it, put it on, jump, deploy it, and glide to a safe landing. The parachute would be useful only in very limited circumstances, such as if the aircraft became irresponsive but was still flying.

  8. THIS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is not it, what a joke. I'm not even going to LOL this. er...

  9. Re: Muslim technology by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    Woosh?

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  10. Re:Muslim technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hear that Dubai you can call al-Uber and issue the command "jihad!" and it will land on top of the nearest infidel

    In Dubai, the nearest infidel is usually within 10 meters, and easy to spot. Just look for anyone doing any actual work, and it is likely a Catholic Filipino. About 80% of the population are transient workers.

  11. Not the First by SeattleLawGuy · · Score: 1

    It's hardly the first city with flying taxis. You can book helicopter flights in NYC now, for example. They're just pricey.

    --
    Real lawyers write in C++
  12. Re: Muslim technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Moron. #CrookedHillary lost on her own evil deeds.

    And now Krooked Kushner is following suit. No doubt Trump would post a tweet denying such hypocrisy... assuming he could spell the word.

  13. Dubai needs a big fat nuke. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Solve the world's problems at the source.

  14. Half the population by agm · · Score: 1

    I wonder if half the population will be prohibited from flying them.

  15. First city? by FredrikKarlsson · · Score: 1

    Have you been to Monacco? They have Helicopters for taxis. There are several companies that specializing in flying.

  16. Re: Muslim technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    9/12?

  17. One step closer to the 5th element by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Korben Dallas approves.
    Leeloo Dallas Multipass also approves.

  18. #AllahYourSnackbar! *CRASH*BOOM!* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's all we need. A bunch of crazed camel-fuckers in flying projectile weapons.

  19. Step on it Corbin! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll be getting my Multi-Pass!

  20. One job at a time by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

    First get autonomous cars and flying cars sorted as separate entities before you try and combine the two.

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    1. Re:One job at a time by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      It might be counter intuitive, but an autonomous flying vehicle is much simpler than an autonomous ground vehicle.

      You simply design an invisible grid of flight pathes, with apropriated flight hights, depending on direction. E.g. west to east in flit hight 300 - 500 feet, north to south 600 - 900 feet.

      You likely only will have fixed landing sites, so you need an angle for approching flights and another for departing flights, and you easily have an intersection free greed of light paths.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    2. Re:One job at a time by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      It might be counter intuitive, but an autonomous flying vehicle is much simpler than an autonomous ground vehicle.

      You simply design an invisible grid of flight pathes, with apropriated flight hights, depending on direction. E.g. west to east in flit hight 300 - 500 feet, north to south 600 - 900 feet.

      You likely only will have fixed landing sites, so you need an angle for approching flights and another for departing flights, and you easily have an intersection free greed of light paths.

      Hmmm. you think having multiple directions of travel at different heights, that all will need traversing is a simpler system than having the all in the same direction road ways we have? Ok, there's a lot more space so it will be less congested but I wouldn't agree a flying car is simpler than a road one for two key reasons. 1) the amount of directions a thing can come from and 2) the post crash scenario.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    3. Re:One job at a time by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. you think having multiple directions of travel at different heights, that all will need traversing is a simpler system than having the all in the same direction road ways we have?
      Yes it is.
      Air traffic already works that way.

      1) the amount of directions a thing can come from
      It cant. It can onyl come from one direction. Seems you did not grasp my explanation about "flight paths".

      2) the post crash scenario.
      Yeah, the flying car will likely land (with a parachute) on a road with ordinary cars :D

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    4. Re:One job at a time by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. you think having multiple directions of travel at different heights, that all will need traversing is a simpler system than having the all in the same direction road ways we have? Yes it is. Air traffic already works that way.

      Yes. and they have at least 2-3 miles of separation per vehicle which travel in narrow paths in a few set directions. They also separate by height on the same directions. Contrast to the flying cars which could be going literally any direction. I assume your height things are 100m-200m for 0-5degress 200-300m for 5-10 degrees etc, leading on to

      1) the amount of directions a thing can come from It cant. It can onyl come from one direction. Seems you did not grasp my explanation about "flight paths".

      And how do you propose these vehicles navigate between different height levels? What if someone wants to change destination and turn around, surely they'll need a new height level which could be anything depending on your system. Even if you limit it to N,E,S,W over a city thats 4 layers of traffic coming up and down over any potential destination.

      2) the post crash scenario. Yeah, the flying car will likely land (with a parachute) on a road with ordinary cars :D

      Nothing can possibly go wrong with this

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    5. Re:One job at a time by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      What if someone wants to change destination and turn around,
      Then they fly to the next corridor, where you can change destination.

      Even if you limit it to N,E,S,W over a city thats 4 layers of traffic coming up and down over any potential destination.
      No, they use dedicated decent paths on every landing point.
      E.g. you can only decent coming from around 0 degrees and your ascent has to go towards 180 degrees.

      As I said before: ordinary air traffic is already more or less organized like that.

      Especially over a city you can not simply fly straight from A to B on a hight you want.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  21. Who is Innovating Exactly ? by nukenerd · · Score: 1

    FTFA :-

    to lead the Arab world in innovation. ...... The flying taxi developed by German drone firm Volocopter .....

    I'm afraid they lost me there.

    1. Re:Who is Innovating Exactly ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In order to convince Arabs to pay for this crap, they had to sell them story they will be leading in something. They have done that many times over and over again, and it always works, after all they even built them a f@^@5 snow mountain in the middle of the desert, and told them they will have best skiers in the world...tallest buildings, the whole works. You got to get those petrol dollars back some how:) I'm baffled how dumb they must be to believe in it each and every time. Most expensive building with maintenance so high they will need to close it down the second oil dries up... Let them have the flying taxi...as long as they do not sly in to shit all over the world, it is all good...

  22. Traffic Congestion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How did they solve the traffic congestion problem that will happens when all the taxi drone want to land on all at the same time and place ?

  23. First City? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, I think flying taxis have been around in Canada and Alaska for a long, long time. Hell, some Alaska towns , in some cases, has nothing but flying taxis!

  24. Re: Muslim technology by Jesus+H+Rolle · · Score: 1

    4:20

  25. Flying Taxi by dorothycoughlan · · Score: 1

    Wow! i hope this really happens. I'm very lucky to be living in this era. https://drugabusecontrol.com/

  26. Re: Muslim technology by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

    Moron. #CrookedHillary lost on her own evil deeds.

    And now Krooked Kushner is following suit. No doubt Trump would post a tweet denying such hypocrisy... assuming he could spell the word.

    It's been apparent for a while now that hypocrisy is not a concept that Republicans understand. There is no intellectual consistency, only political expedience.

    --
    "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)