Flying cars

[MDMAngel]

Since a lot of you forum posters are really good in problem solving, how would you guys suppose flying cars will change traffic? What kind of methods do you find it possible to make such a ridiculous contraption (as we would see it now)?

What problems would it pose? What of air traffic? Parking? Accidents? Safety precautions?

So, how would you suppose we could perform it, and if possible... is it a good or a bad idea? [let's make it a poll, Flying cars GOOD: Flying cars BAD].

[devonin]

Re: Just a thought...

I can't even begin to state how ludicrously inefficient and useless flying cars would be. For any even remotely short travel distance, they'd be nigh useless, and for sufficiently long distance, planes already come in small sizes for personal use.

I suppose you might be meaning -hovering- cars? That might make a little more sense as a "Future WOW!" technology to be figuring might be forthcoming.

[rzr]

Re: Just a thought...

Regardless of its efficiency, they would undoubtedly create enormous amounts of pollution that would be even more detrimental to Earth's survival. I mean, they could be efficient if, in theory, half the population used "land cars" and have used "air cars." That would refuse ground traffic by about 50%, also assuming their cost was equal to ground cars. Also, how would you regulate the air traffic? Firstly, we'd need, what, skyhooks, to leave markings for directions. Second, you'd need to secure the safe travel of plane to car ratio. I mean, in general, you'd have an entire road system in the air. So, how do we get all the objects on the road to float? Parking wouldn't be a big issue, it would be the same as now.

[MDMAngel]

Re: Just a thought...

I can't even begin to state how ludicrously inefficient and useless flying cars would be. For any even remotely short travel distance, they'd be nigh useless, and for sufficiently long distance, planes already come in small sizes for personal use.

I suppose you might be meaning -hovering- cars? That might make a little more sense as a "Future WOW!" technology to be figuring might be forthcoming.

Haha, I know. I just wanted to know if people COULD find a use for flying cars, and I know there aren't many good things in flying cars.

As for hovering cars, the problem with that is that we would need to make an all directing repelling force upon the car so the tilt of the car doesn't make it easy to knock over and cause disaster.

You also have to take into account what the costs could possibly be (or even health problems it could impose) to have such a car.

The main purpose of me making this thread is to discuss flying cars as such. You know, point out some things I didn't really think of at first. (:

(edit):

Regardless of its efficiency, they would undoubtedly create enormous amounts of pollution that would be even more detrimental to Earth's survival. I mean, they could be efficient if, in theory, half the population used "land cars" and have used "air cars." That would refuse ground traffic by about 50%, also assuming their cost was equal to ground cars. Also, how would you regulate the air traffic? Firstly, we'd need, what, skyhooks, to leave markings for directions. Second, you'd need to secure the safe travel of plane to car ratio. I mean, in general, you'd have an entire road system in the air. So, how do we get all the objects on the road to float? Parking wouldn't be a big issue, it would be the same as now.

Statistically, the numbers are an assumption. As for everything else, that's the kind of answers I'm looking for.
Parking is an issue when you need to figure where to go from air to ground. The thing is, you can't just drop into a parking zone...

That poses multiple safety problems, and you can't just land next to a parking zone for nearly just the same reason. Also, what kind of thrust would we need to lift a car into the air, considering its size, weight, etc.?

What kind of methods of lifting would we need to make such a thing possible at its safest? Even if it's not a good idea to attempt...

(edit 2): Back at devonin, personal jets can be too expensive for practical use. That doesn't mean, however, that you can't make them cheaper.

[devonin]

Re: Just a thought...

I didn't say anything about personal jets, I said personal aircraft. The kind of thing that seats like many cars do: Two people, maybe a third or fourth if they squeeze. When you say "Personal Jet" I'm picturing 'Air Force One' for just me to use. I mean the kind of small aircraft that you get lisenced to fly yourself (And which you can get at 17 years old) and it would be easy enough, if that sort of thing became more widespread, for people to start operating aircraft rental businesses at major airports.

[MDMAngel]

Re: Just a thought...

I didn't say anything about personal jets, I said personal aircraft. The kind of thing that seats like many cars do: Two people, maybe a third or fourth if they squeeze. When you say "Personal Jet" I'm picturing 'Air Force One' for just me to use. I mean the kind of small aircraft that you get licensed to fly yourself (And which you can get at 17 years old) and it would be easy enough, if that sort of thing became more widespread, for people to start operating aircraft rental businesses at major airports.

Oh, sorry for the misinterpretation. Happens quite often.

I see where you're going, but the costs of these things and go up to millions of dollars... which isn't practical for every day use of the normal person... (in terms of economics).

Personal Aircraft's can be considered flying cars, but learning to drive a "flying car" (as many people interpret it) will take less learning to drive, and a high population of Americans don't want to learn something harder to use.

Although, I do see where you're going with this... in fact, it's the first time I've heard of an aircraft. So, thank you for the information.

[devonin]

Re: Just a thought...

I mean things like this


My point is that any "flying" vehicle, even things with VTOL capability (helicopters etc) would just be not at all efficient for short distances of travel.

And for longer distances, aircraft like the above one already exist to move smaller numbers of people over long distances in the air.

I simply deny that airborne vehicles for personal use would ever become "practical for every day use of the normal person" to use your phrase.

[MDMAngel]

Re: Just a thought...

My point is that any "flying" vehicle, even things with VTOL capability (helicopters etc) would just be not at all efficient for short distances of travel.

And for longer distances, aircraft like the above one already exist to move smaller numbers of people over long distances in the air.

I simply deny that airborne vehicles for personal use would ever become "practical for every day use of the normal person" to use your phrase.

Are you referring to the speed of arrival? I'm referring to the population crisis (which can easily be fixed by other means) which may be desired to fix through air travel, and highly escalated buildings, in which the 3rd Dimension of owning property takes place...

I know it's not a good way to fix it, but this is a hypothetical question... not to say it will happen.

[dynamite1]

Re: Just a thought...

Personal Aircraft's can be considered flying cars, but learning to drive a "flying car" (as many people interpret it) will take less learning to drive, and a high population of Americans don't want to learn something harder to use.

You can't really expect the driving controls to be just as easy when cars are in the air. You'll need something to control your acceleration since you're not on the ground, and you'll also need to be able to move up and down. A simple steering wheel and gas pedal won't do this, so driving will become harder.

Also, if there are any collisions in mid-air, you'll have 2 cars crashing to the ground, and would have the potential to destroy buildings and kill more people. You don't hear of two jets colliding very often since few people use them, but commercializing flying cars would increase the rate of car accidents.

And it would probably use more fuel and will cause gas prices to go even higher.

[MDMAngel]

Re: Just a thought...

You can't really expect the driving controls to be just as easy when cars are in the air. You'll need something to control your acceleration since you're not on the ground, and you'll also need to be able to move up and down. A simple steering wheel and gas pedal won't do this, so driving will become harder.

Also, if there are any collisions in mid-air, you'll have 2 cars crashing to the ground, and would have the potential to destroy buildings and kill more people. You don't hear of two jets colliding very often since few people use them, but commercializing flying cars would increase the rate of car accidents.

And it would probably use more fuel and will cause gas prices to go even higher.

Hahaha, I never said it was a good idea... I'm trying to see how many bad things can go wrong in contrast to the good.

I am not supporting flying cars at all. On the contrary, I'm against them being produced.

This was meant to be a more pro/con kind of question. I didn't notice it wasn't clear, it was kind of late when I made it.

[Millerhead]

Re: Just a thought...

it will provoke pollution even more

[devonin]

Re: Just a thought...

Are you referring to the speed of arrival? I'm referring to the population crisis (which can easily be fixed by other means) which may be desired to fix through air travel, and highly escalated buildings, in which the 3rd Dimension of owning property takes place...

Wait...you're suggesting that to deal with overpopulation, we'll build incredibly tall buildings, and give people flying cars to get to the top of them? Why would we not just, you know, build faster elevators? I've taken the elevator to the top of the CN tower, the tallest freestanding structure in the world, and it certainly didn't take all that long. I can't see why buildings for work and living (which would pretty much have to be shorter to be sufficiently stable for permanant residence) couldn't use similar and already existing technology.

I wasn't referring to speed of arrival, I was referring to the fact that you need a large and open space to allow aircraft to take off and land. If you had to taxi your personal flying car for half an hour out of town to get to a strip you could take off from, it would rather defeat the purpose.

it will provoke pollution even more

Welcome to the Critical Thinking Sob forum. Make sure you review the forum rules before you post. While your statement may well be correct, you need to provide reasons, evidence or logic to support claims when you post here.

[MDMAngel]

Re: Just a thought...

Wait...you're suggesting that to deal with overpopulation, we'll build incredibly tall buildings, and give people flying cars to get to the top of them? Why would we not just, you know, build faster elevators? I've taken the elevator to the top of the CN tower, the tallest freestanding structure in the world, and it certainly didn't take all that long. I can't see why buildings for work and living (which would pretty much have to be shorter to be sufficiently stable for permanant residence) couldn't use similar and already existing technology.

I wasn't referring to speed of arrival, I was referring to the fact that you need a large and open space to allow aircraft to take off and land. If you had to taxi your personal flying car for half an hour out of town to get to a strip you could take off from, it would rather defeat the purpose.

Haha, it's hard to find things to support the idea... I have nothing left.

PS: Flying cars would also invoke a security problem to other countries.

[Reach]

Re: Flying cars

Well, if cars could easily and efficiently hover over buildings etc we could have a much more effective transport system.

Obviously, the entire system would have to be controlled by computers. Every car would have to be piloted by a computer(s) that monitor the entire system for a given area. It could be incredibly effective, given there would be no need for traffic stops etc so you could get from one place to another very quickly. Traffic stops and accidents could be removed entirely with a completely computerized transit system, given the only reason they exist are because of human error or simple inability while driving.

As such, I would think such hover cars could be more eco friendly than current cars assuming the technology was available to pull this off. We have quite a ways to go before such technology will exist, though I can see computer controlled transport in the not too far off future.

[rzr]

Re: Flying cars

Let's just imagine it -- Drunk air accidents. No more needs to be said.