Slashdot Mirror
Are We Getting Close To Flying Taxis? (knpr.org)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from public news station KNPR about how close weare flying taxi services:
The dream of flying cars is as at least as old as the automobile itself. Bell, which makes attack helicopters for the U.S. Navy, is working on this new project with another high-profile partner, Uber. The prototype, the Bell Nexus, was unveiled earlier this year. Boeing and Airbus also have prototypes of these flying cars in the works. Uber has become the face of the aerial mobility movement as it has the most public campaign touting its work so far. Elon Musk says he'll get us to Mars. Uber says it'll get a millennial from San Francisco to San Jose in 15 minutes flat (instead of the two-hour slog in morning traffic). And its timeline for this flying taxi that does not yet exist is 2023...
NASA is another Uber partner. While Jaiwon Shin, NASA's associate administrator for the Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, thinks Uber is being a little bullish -- he'd put the timeline further out, to the mid-2020s -- Shin says it's close. "Convergence of many different technologies are maturing to the level that now aviation can benefit to put these things together," he said. The batteries that power electric cars can evolve further, to power flight. Companies can stockpile and pool data, and build artificial intelligence to take over air traffic control, managing the thousands of drones and taxis in the air.
And Uber, his partner, is really well-connected. While fighting the legacy taxi industry, Uber made so many government and lobbyist contacts, that that Rolodex can help grease the wheels -- or wings.
"While no flying taxi exists yet, Uber has dared to estimate the 'near-term' cost of that San Francisco to San Jose trip: $43," the article reports -- suggesting that could create a new division in society.
"With flying cars, the haves can escape to the air and leave the have-nots forgotten in their potholes."
NASA is another Uber partner. While Jaiwon Shin, NASA's associate administrator for the Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, thinks Uber is being a little bullish -- he'd put the timeline further out, to the mid-2020s -- Shin says it's close. "Convergence of many different technologies are maturing to the level that now aviation can benefit to put these things together," he said. The batteries that power electric cars can evolve further, to power flight. Companies can stockpile and pool data, and build artificial intelligence to take over air traffic control, managing the thousands of drones and taxis in the air.
And Uber, his partner, is really well-connected. While fighting the legacy taxi industry, Uber made so many government and lobbyist contacts, that that Rolodex can help grease the wheels -- or wings.
"While no flying taxi exists yet, Uber has dared to estimate the 'near-term' cost of that San Francisco to San Jose trip: $43," the article reports -- suggesting that could create a new division in society.
"With flying cars, the haves can escape to the air and leave the have-nots forgotten in their potholes."
Oh god please no. Since the only way we humans can make things fly is either by blasting air downwards (think Harrier jet) or by making something that looks like a helicopter or an airplane, any flying taxi (big enough to fit a human) would mean unacceptable levels of noise pollution in cities and even in suburbs. Imagine having a helicopter landing several feet from your window while trying to sleep.
As big of a son of a bitch Neil Degrasse Tyson is for demoting Pluto, he was spot on when he explained to Joe Rogan why we'll never get flying cars in any sort of common place.
The big problem is that they will likely always be loud, energy inefficient and unnecessary. Flying cars would appear to solve the problem of insufficient road space. The problem is that we've already got effective solutions to that which would likely be more cost effective over the long term. We have the ability to tunnel under cities and to build monorails, elevated trains and turnpikes over the city if we need to. We can also increase the effiency of our system by using technology to decrease the space needed between cars and to have automated buses that can transport people in groups with much more efficiency.
We likely will eventually get trains which operate on a continuous loop with individual passenger cars joining and leaving the train as needed to drop off passengers without anybody else having to slow down.
These are admittedly future innovations, but they're things that would have far more practical utility.
The only situations I can think of where flying cars would be a reasonable solution would be in remote areas where you can't or don't want to build roads and bridges. In cities where people want for these cars to be used wouldn't give much benefit to make up for all the problems.
Yep, but flying taxis powered by nuclear fusion will be 10 years away of course.
The reality is that we already have flying taxis -- they're called *helicopters* but the economics simply don't stack up.
An electric-powered flying taxi (of the type commonly popping up as "real soon now") is woefully lacking in economics -- even worse than a helicopter. In order for a vehicle like this to be operated at a profit it must spend a very high percentiage of the day "in operation". The problem with EVs (of all kinds) is that they have significant down-time whilst being recharged.
A gas-powered heli can be refueled in minutes so can operate at its normal hourly recovery-rate for most of the day. An electric flying taxi will spend as much (or more) time on the ground being recharged as it does actually flying -- hence the economics (by way of the return on capital) will be unworkable.