Uber is researching a new vertical-takeoff ride offering that flies you around

[FrodosPet]

Uber is researching a new vertical-takeoff ride offering that flies you around

Do you want to fly to work?

http://www.recode.net/2016/9/25/13048094/uber-vertical-takeoff-aircraft-jeff-holden

BY KARA SWISHER @KARASWISHER SEP 25, 2016, 12:00P

In an onstage interview with me today at the Nantucket Conference, Uber products head Jeff Holden said that the fast-growing ride-sharing company was seriously looking at a new form of transportation to offer its customers: Short-haul flying in cities.

The technology is called VTOL — which stands for vertical takeoff and landing. Simply put, VTOL is an aircraft that can hover, take off and land vertically, which would also describe a helicopter. But, unlike the typical helicopter, these planes have multiple rotors, could have fixed wings and perhaps eventually would use batteries and be more silent. In time, like cars, such aircraft would be autonomous.

Holden said that he has been researching the area, “so we can someday offer our customers as many options as possible to move around.” He added that “doing it in a three-dimensional way is an obvious thing to look at.”

Holden said in the interview that such technology could be in use within a decade, which is an aggressive prediction, given the issues around the complexity of movement in the air above densely populated areas. (Also, you know, the possibility of these VTOL vehicles crashing into each other.)

~ snip ~

People keep asking for flying cars. OK, they weren't here in 2001, but supposedly they are coming.

Imagine a roadless future! Think of how much less of the organic Earth would need to be torn up and covered in cold dead pavement with a widespread fleet of self flying aircraft.

[misterhighwasted]

1. LOL

[Major Nikon]

2. We had flying cars back in the 50's

[FrodosPet]

3. But not self flying VTOL

The verticalness is the difference.

[Major Nikon]

4. Nobody was seriously considering self flying VTOL in 2001

The idea back then was a commercially viable conventional aircraft that could be driven on roadways. Interestingly the reason the Aerocar died back in the 50's was not because of aeronautical requirements, but rather new safety requirements for ground vehicles.

[tonyt53]

7. Popular Science at the same time said we'd all have personal helicopters too!

[Major Nikon]

9. That actually happened

There's all sorts of rotorcraft that people now own and utilize for personal use.

[catnhatnh]

10. Yeah-except no....

That is not a helicopter, it is a gyrocopter and is not capable of vertical flight...

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

[A HERETIC I AM]

13. Yeah-except yes....

The Mosquito

They offer a piston engine model as well

[catnhatnh]

14. I didn't mean there were none...

Just that what the picture showed wasn't one-the picture is the guy who landed the gyrocopter at the White house.

[Major Nikon]

16. That's why I said rotorcraft

Both helicopters and autogyros are particular types of rotorcraft and there are examples of both for personal use, although there are many more autogyros around for that purpose.

[jmowreader]

15. That was the point of the Robinson R22

Frank Robinson designed a small, inexpensive helicopter for people to commute to work in. People couldn't understand why they'd spend a quarter-million dollars on Frank's death trap helicopter when a $2000 used car would also get you to work.

[Major Nikon]

17. The biggest obstacle is learning how to fly it

If anyone could do it they could be mass produced and the cost would decrease significantly. NASA is well aware of this and is encouraging the development of personal aircraft to ease congestion on roadways. It remains to be seen if this vision will ever be realized, but the technology is certainly within grasp.

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

[Blue_Tires]

5. Yeah, and I might flap my arms and fly to the moon...

Daydreaming bullshit and nothing more...

Of course he could have said something halfway grounded in reality like helicopters, but the operating costs/logistics/regulatory hurdles are already well known and would have thrown cold water on this circle-jerk

[Orrex]

19. Nice post, Hawkeye.

[Lee-Lee]

6. Not seeing this overcoming the FAA in 10 years

Much less all the other hurdles.

The FAA is very, very slow and deliberate when it comes to changes in aviation, particularly when it involves carrying passengers for hire.

[bighart]

8. January 2016

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/chinese-company-reveals-human-carrying-autonomous-drone-article-1.2488060

[csziggy]

11. That should be fun!

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

12. The Nantucket Conference is just a den of pretentious quackery and scams

None of these "conferences" should be taken that seriously.

[Major Nikon]

18. That may be true, but NASA and the FAA certainly takes this particular concept seriously

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

[Heeeeers Johnny]

20. The Beta version had moderate success

they just needed to work out a few bugs.

[img][/img]