# Autonomous driving’s godfather and tech investors say the world is ready for flying cars



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

"There's no reason to be stuck in traffic anymore when we can fly," Thrun said. "With a flying vehicle, I would make it from Palo Alto to San Francisco in 10 minutes and pay 50 cents in electricity costs. People say it's a decade [away], it's two years away honestly. There's no technical reason it can't be done, it's much more a societal reason."

https://techcrunch.com/2017/09/19/a...stors-say-the-world-is-ready-for-flying-cars/

Let the Tomato hate begin. Bring it all you haters!


----------



## Spotscat (May 8, 2017)

Mechanix Illustrated - March 1957








Popular Mechanics - January 1991










"I come from a state that raises corn and cotton and cockleburrs and Democrats, and frothy eloquence neither convinces nor satisfies me. I am from Missouri. You have got to show me." - Rep. Willard Duncan Vandiver (D-Mo) - 1899


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

Spotscat said:


> Mechanix Illustrated - March 1957
> View attachment 159837
> 
> Popular Mechanics - January 1991
> ...


Lilium is in the lead.

https://www.reuters.com/video/2017/09/05/flying-taxi-startup-lilium-raises-90-mln?videoId=372469544


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Here we go again!


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

tomatopaste said:


> Lilium is in the lead.
> 
> https://www.reuters.com/video/2017/09/05/flying-taxi-startup-lilium-raises-90-mln?videoId=372469544


Do you honestly believe what Thrun is saying, or just trying to amuse us here (because is working)?


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

jocker12 said:


> Do you honestly believe what Thrun is saying, or just trying to amuse us here (because is working)?


Both. But Thrun is definitely right about flying taxis being ready within two years. In many respects, they're easier than self driving cars. The five pax Lilium taxi's first human test flight is in 2019. We're 3 months from 2018.


----------



## PrestonT (Feb 15, 2017)

It amuses to me to no end that someone would think that putting taxi and rideshare drivers in a flying vehicles is actually a good idea. When you have a fender bender in the air, everything falls down.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

Even a minor accident would be fatal to all involved. With 50 million vehicles in the air, there will be a lot of accidents


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

PrestonT said:


> It amuses to me to no end that someone would think that putting taxi and rideshare drivers in a flying vehicles is actually a good idea. When you have a fender bender in the air, everything falls down.


Drivers nor pilots are part of the equation. 100 percent autonomous.



Rat said:


> Even a minor accident would be fatal to all involved. With 50 million vehicles in the air, there will be a lot of accidents


There will zero. They will be flown by computer


----------



## PrestonT (Feb 15, 2017)

tomatopaste said:


> Drivers nor pilots are part of the equation. 100 percent autonomous.
> 
> There will zero. They will be flown by computer


Oh there we go! Computers NEVER fail!


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

tomatopaste said:


> Drivers nor pilots are part of the equation. 100 percent autonomous.
> 
> There will zero. They will be flown by computer


Hahaha... You need to check te FAA crazy strict regulations. I fly a video drone DJI Mavic pro and trust me, there is no way to put an object above 200 feet on a 5 miles radius from the closest airport, unless you establish a 2 way communication with the control tower. I encourage you to download the free app B4UFly and see how many airports, helicopter platforms, or water ports for hydroplanes are around you. They are everywhere and the 5 miles radius makes it impossible to do anything above the big cities.

This is what Thrun is not telling you - FAA regulations.

You are a funny guy, seriously! I'm a little jealous you can keep a straight face to all this nonsense!


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

jocker12 said:


> Hahaha... You need to check te FAA crazy strict regulations. I fly a video drone DJI Mavic pro and trust me, there is no way to put an object above 200 feet on a 5 miles radius from the closest airport, unless you establish a 2 way communication with the control tower. I encourage you to download the free app B4UFly and see how many airports, helicopter platforms, or water ports for hydroplanes are around you. They are everywhere and the 5 miles radius makes it impossible to do anything above the big cities.
> 
> This is what Thrun is not telling you - FAA regulations.
> 
> You are a funny guy, seriously! I'm a little jealous you can keep a straight face to all this nonsense!


You have no vision. The house SDC bill passed unanimously. Laws will be updated to accomodate flying taxis. There's no other choice. The world will simply pass by any country that doesn't keep up.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

tomatopaste said:


> You have no vision. The house SDC bill passed unanimously. Laws will be updated to accomodate flying taxis. There's no other choice. The world will simply pass by any country that doesn't keep up.


"No other choice." What a wonderful closing argument!


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

tomatopaste said:


> You have no vision. The house SDC bill passed unanimously. Laws will be updated to accomodate flying taxis. There's no other choice. The world will simply pass by any country that doesn't keep up.


Hahaha ... I have night vision, and that puts me at a big advantage; it gives me common sense.

All the flying cars need is a flock of birds sucked up in the propellers. Do you think sparrows will do?


----------



## PrestonT (Feb 15, 2017)

jocker12 said:


> Hahaha ... I have night vision, and that puts me at a big advantage; it gives me common sense.
> 
> All the flying cars need is a flock of birds sucked up in the propellers. Do you think sparrows will do?


Or some kid with a drone.


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

goneubering said:


> "No other choice." What a wonderful closing argument!


Well, you could always become Cuba, I guess.

https://i.amz.mshcdn.com/qjxyJKcx0d...ubas-classic-cars/Cuba%20Classic%20Cars-2.jpg



jocker12 said:


> Hahaha ... I have night vision, and that puts me at a big advantage; it gives me common sense.
> 
> All the flying cars need is a flock of birds sucked up in the propellers. Do you think sparrows will do?


As with most things, the more adventurous types will adopt it first. Then after a decade or so the rest of you might be willing to try it. On a closed track, covered 10 feet deep with marshmallows



PrestonT said:


> Oh there we go! Computers NEVER fail!


doesn't mean you fall out of the sky and die


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

PrestonT said:


> Or some kid with a drone.


Hahaha... This forums are funny... Do you know we use drones on construction sites for safety inspections? Now come back at me with a grumpy face and a good joke!


----------



## PrestonT (Feb 15, 2017)

jocker12 said:


> Hahaha... This forums are funny... Do you know we use drones on construction sites for safety inspections? Now come back to me with a grumpy face and a good joke!


Silly response. Your using drones for professional purposes is entirely unrelated to the possibility of kids intentionally or unintentionally flying them into the paths of flying cars.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Mehhhh.

I want an ultralight seaplane !

To go fishing with.
Need to build ice chests into pontoons.



tomatopaste said:


> Both. But Thrun is definitely right about flying taxis being ready within two years. In many respects, they're easier than self driving cars. The five pax Lilium taxi's first human test flight is in 2019. We're 3 months from 2018.


First time a beer bottle hits my house from a flying taxi
There will be Hell to pay !

And i dont care for the idea of flying pukers either !
You think they get car sick ?
I used to fly in light to heavy helicopters daily.
Cessna skywagons seaplanes.
Its not like a 747.
The air beats you up.
A LOT.
SOBER PEOPLE WILL PUKE.



PrestonT said:


> It amuses to me to no end that someone would think that putting taxi and rideshare drivers in a flying vehicles is actually a good idea. When you have a fender bender in the air, everything falls down.


In flaming pieces.
All over neighborhoods.

Then rescue comes out and looks for pieces. A foot here. A head there.



PrestonT said:


> Oh there we go! Computers NEVER fail!


Ask Equifax and 300 million victims about RELIABILITY !

Saw Hillary squawking last night about Russian Hackers.


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

jocker12 said:


> Hahaha ... I have night vision, and that puts me at a big advantage; it gives me common sense.
> 
> All the flying cars need is a flock of birds sucked up in the propellers. Do you think sparrows will do?


Why do you always feel the need to preface your arguments with 'hahaha?' Almost as if you're not confident in the argument standing on its own.

There won't be collisions, but there will be catastrophic failures as with every machine man has created thus far. However in the case of the Lilium jet it will have tremendous redundancies, like 36 separate jet engines.

Well what if 36 separate birds flew into each engine?
Then it would fall from the sky and the parachute would deploy, like this:




Well what if it landed in an active volcano?
Then you would die.
Yeah but then you would be dead.
Correct you would be dead.
Wow! you just admitted that these things are killers


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

We are sorry to announce
NO ONE IS GOING TO WORK TODAY due to thunderstorms.

We have to wait45 minutes sir to de ice your flying car.

F.A.A. has grounded 5,000 flying cars due to 2 accidents.

Your flying car total engine rebuild as mandated by F.A.A. will cost you $35,000.00
Up front.

We only have 50 mile range if you take your luggage sir. We must reduce fuel weight to accomodate baggage.


----------



## Spotscat (May 8, 2017)

tomatopaste said:


> There will zero. They will be flown by computer


George flew his own car...












PrestonT said:


> Silly response. Your using drones for professional purposes is entirely unrelated to the possibility of kids intentionally or unintentionally flying them into the paths of flying cars.


Isis is already considering the use of explosives on flying drones, using them to attack soft targets. I'm sure they would love a flying vehicle with a larger capacity!

Consider the possibility of a 9/11-style attack using a flying vehicle instead of an airplane - pack a platform with explosives and fly it into a target of your choice, a sort of poor man's cruise missile.

Now I am certain that Tomatopaste will counter with the argument that there will be computers onboard that will prevent this from happening. As we all know, any computer system can be hacked, programming changed, security protocols defeated.

And as you may recall, Timothy McVeigh didn't drive his truck into the Federal building, he drove it close enough to the building for the explosives to take effect - and that is all that would be needed with a flying vehicle bomb.

What will we have to protect us in this dystopian future?


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

tohunt4me said:


> We are sorry to announce
> NO ONE IS GOING TO WORK TODAY due to thunderstorms.
> 
> We have to wait45 minutes sir to de ice your flying car.
> ...


Thunderstorms it won't fly, you'll have to settle for the self driving taxi.
Same in very high winds.
Won't fly in ice either.
The other 95 percent of the time it'll be sweet.
Fatties will have to fly by themselves with just a carry-on.
Lilium will grab one of their small electric jet engines off the shelf, slip it in with the other 35 electric jet engines and have the flying taxi back up and running in less than 20 minutes.
https://tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/lilium-jet-white-back-diagonal-with-gear.jpg
There is no added fuel weight. It's electric.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

I'm holding out for a flying motorcycle!

https://www.google.com/amp/sanfranc...7/09/19/silicon-valley-flying-motorcycle/amp/


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

Spotscat said:


> George flew his own car...
> 
> View attachment 160100
> 
> ...


I'm thinking a huge dome around the whole country.


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

PrestonT said:


> Silly response. Your using drones for professional purposes is entirely unrelated to the possibility of kids intentionally or unintentionally flying them into the paths of flying cars.


My bad, I misunderstood you and I apologize. Thought you were sarcastic because I fly a drone.... Anyway, you are correct!


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

Spotscat said:


> George flew his own car...


George was a neanderthal


----------



## Spotscat (May 8, 2017)

tomatopaste said:


> I'm thinking a huge dome around the whole country.


Forgetting for a moment the environmental impact such a dome would have... how, pray tell, do you propose to fund such an ambitious project?


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

Spotscat said:


> Forgetting for a moment the environmental impact such a dome would have... how, pray tell, do you propose to fund such an ambitious project?


I don't. It's a joke.


----------



## Spotscat (May 8, 2017)

tomatopaste said:


> George was a neanderthal


Fred Flintstone was a Neanderthal.

George Jetson is a "digital index operator" for Spacely's Space Sprockets - a multinational inter-galactic corporation formed by the leveraged buyouts of Apple, Uber, and Acme Mfg.



tomatopaste said:


> I don't. It's a joke.


You think terrorism is a joke?


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

tomatopaste said:


> I don't. It's a joke.


Acting as though a free society can protect itself from every possible terrorist scenario, yes, I think that is a joke. And the dome part was gold, Jerry, gold.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

tomatopaste said:


> Drivers nor pilots are part of the equation. 100 percent autonomous.
> 
> There will zero. They will be flown by computer


And computers never crash, lose connection or anything like that



jocker12 said:


> Hahaha... This forums are funny... Do you know we use drones on construction sites for safety inspections? Now come back at me with a grumpy face and a good joke!


We also use drones to freak out the neighbor's cat


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

Rat said:


> And computers never crash, lose connection or anything like that
> 
> We also use drones to freak out the neighbor's cat


And soon you'll be using drones to get to and from the airport


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

tomatopaste said:


> And soon you'll be using drones to get to and from the airport


No, I drive to the airport, take out my drone, and try to fly it into the engines as the planes take off


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

Rat said:


> No, I drive to the airport, take out my drone, and try to fly it into the engines as the planes take off


cc: FAA


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

Rat said:


> And computers never crash, lose connection or anything like that
> 
> We also use drones to freak out the neighbor's cat


It's comical how no nerd says flying cars will save lives.


----------



## Retired Senior (Sep 12, 2016)

*Saw this in the news today.....
Actually looks pretty cool, but where is my parachute!!!!!!
I mean, what if a bird of some sort decides to examine it and gets caught in the rotors?

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-co...eeks-to-become-first-city-to-use-flying-taxis
*
* Dubai Wants to Become the First City to Use Flying Taxis *
*Air taxis may be in service sooner than you think. *

By Megan Trimble, Associate Editor, Social Media |Sept. 27, 2017, at 3:40 p.m.











 
 
 
  
Dubai Wants to Become the First City to Use Flying Taxis 
(Dubai Media Office via Twitter)

Forget traditional ground transportation, Dubai wants its citizens to one day be able to pull out their smartphones and call an air taxi when they're trying to reach a new destination.

Dubai, a city and one of seven emirates in the United Arab Emirates, held a flight earlier this week to test a large unmanned, two-seater drone-like vehicle. The display was arranged for Dubai Crown Prince Sheikh Hamdan bin Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, according to the government's media office.

German drone firm Volocopter created the machine, dubbed the Autonomous Air Taxi, that features a two-seater cabin, 18 propellers and is powered by nine batteries. It has a flight time capacity of about 30 minutes. Developers are working to establish regulations and run trial operations over the next five years.

City officials said a successful project would make Dubai the first to host what they call "the world's first self-flying taxi service," and help to position it as a leader in the Arab world in innovation. The project also fits within officials' goal to have a quarter of all car trips in Dubai operate without a driver by 2030.

Dubai joins established ride-hailing companies, like Uber, in the race for driverless technology. But while much of that race is focused on cars, Dubai is reportedly dedicated to expanding its transportation efforts to the skies.

Sheikh Hamdan said in a statement that such technological advancement is key to staying globally competitive.

"Encouraging innovation and adopting the latest technologies contribute not only to the country's development but also build bridges into the future," he said.

The air taxi hovered at about 200 meters high for about five minutes in Monday's test flight, according to Reuters.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

The problem with Hellicopters is that the more of them are the harder it is to do flight plan tracking.

There is a finite number of helicopters you can fly in a city at the same time basically... You need X amount of space between every single one.

That limit is a lot lower than any sort mass market product could envision,


Because it's not just all of uber's helicopters that your trying to not crash into each other, it's everyone's...


And yes.. for the sake of my argument, any sort of flying taxi is a fricken helicopter in my eyes.. It moves the same way, has the same basic flight capabilities.

It's also quite a big deal to land a med-evac hellicopter, that's what is going to need to be done every time you go to land a flying taxi.


Flying cars are great in theory, maybe a handful running at once.. once you put 1000 into the air, it's too hard and too dangerous to manage them.


So yes, technologically it's pheasable.. but no.. it's never going to happen in significant numbers.

1,000,000 vehicles that cost 1 billion in R&D have an individual R&D cost of $1,000 each

1,000 Vehicles that cost 1 billion in R&D have an individual R&D cost of $1,000,000 each.

That's a big difference.. It's also much cheaper to produced 1 million of a vehicle than a few thousand, you'll never get an economy of scale built up to produce them cheap enough that everyone can afford them.

$1 billion in factory construction and tooling,

Per vehicle cost at 1 mil vehicles is $1000 each
Per vehicle cost at 1000 vehicles is $ mil each

Funny how that works out?


Unless you can get large numbers of these in the sky, you will never recoup your R&D cost by any method other than treating it like a 1 mil peice of aerospace engineering.



They will never get their deployment scaled up to the point where it's cheap enough for everyone to afford for it to be worth ever doing.

Flying taxi?

never

Flying Limo?

Maybe...


----------



## Jesusdrivesuber (Jan 5, 2017)

Lol.


----------

