Slashdot Mirror
Airbus Steps Up Push for Flying Taxis, On-Demand Helicopters (bloomberg.com)
The future of transportation may not be on the roads but the skies. That might not be a reality quite yet but Airbus is taking it seriously. The company is settng up a division for flying cars and on-demand taxis. From a report: Airbus SE is creating a division to oversee futuristic transport options such as flying taxis and on-demand helicopters in a sign the European planemaker is going on the offensive against tech providers and startups encroaching in the market. The manufacturer named company veteran Eduardo Dominguez Puerta, 40, on Monday to head its newly formed Urban Air Mobility unit. Puerta helped start the firm's innovation center in Silicon Valley, where he served as chief operating officer. Projects that will be overseen by the division include an autonomous flying cab prototype called CityAirbus, an electric flying taxi named Vahana and Voom, billed by Airbus as a premier on-demand helicopter booking platform. Ride-hailing app creator Uber Technologies and startup Kitty Hawk, backed by Google's co-founder Larry Page, are also working to develop airborne taxis.
There are flying cars -- Google Terrafugia.for one example.
Problem is that they are expensive, require a pilots license, aren't energy efficient. They look to be mediocre aircraft and worse cars. But the prototype Terrafugia flies and drives well enough for a lot of folks to believe they will actually ship vehicles within perhaps 18 months. There are other projects, some at least somewhat credible.
It's also true that those with a money can take helicopter taxi services to a few airports -- e.g $99 for Manhattan to JFK (vs less than $10 by rail).
Personally, I suspect that the need for dedicated helipads, dubious fuel economy, questionable safety, need for Air Traffic Control on a scale many orders of magnitude greater than any ever implemented, etc are likely to keep "flying cars" pretty much a thing of the future for many decades or, quite likely, centuries.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
The Harrier Jump Jet has been around for over half a century. The technology for flying cars is well within reach
Sigh... I don't know if you are trolling or stupid. We do not have any technology (nor any reasonably likely near term technology) for power sources with sufficient power density (power to weight) to enable a usable flying car. If you think any part of that sentence is wrong then you do not adequately understand physics enough to be a part of this conversation.
The Harrier jet in no way shape or form resembles a flying car nor is the technology in a Harrier jet scalable down to enable one. Do you have any idea how big one of these things is? How much fuel it consumes? Do you comprehend how much maintenance there is for such a device? How much infrastructure is required to maintain one? Where do you plan to land it aside from an airport? Why not save money and just buy/rent a plane and a car both of which can do more and cost less? This is not technology that can be scaled down to the size of a family sedan even if we ignore the legion of other problems. Your argument is as absurd as saying we're going to have a moon colony soon because we've managed to have a few men walk there.
The only obstacles we have are scaling prices down to reasonable levels for civilian ownership of such vehicles and figuring out a way to make mass aerial transit not the massive hazard it potentially is.
Ok you are actually retarded if you think it's that simple. Here are just a few of the showstopper problems preventing flying cars. This list isn't even close to complete but every item on it is a showstopper.
1) No power source with adequate power to weight ratio nor any prospect of one
2) No adequately robust navigation/piloting system for aerial transit by non-pilots
3) Very few people are adequately trained pilots
4) No infrastructure for takeoff/landing anywhere except existing airports
5) It's cheaper to have a plane and a car than one that does both
6) A purpose built plane or car will outperform a vehicle that does both
7) No obvious economic problem solved by a flying car
8) Any vehicle light enough to get off the ground is too fragile to endure traveling on the ground
9) Enormous and unresolved liability issues in the event of accidents
10) Cost of fuel will be prohibitive for anyone but the richest of individuals
11) Cost of maintenance will be prohibitive