LogFAQs > #910499196

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, Database 4 ( 07.23.2018-12.31.2018 ), DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	It's 2018, why don't we have the robots from Rocky 4 yet?
Zeus 10/14/18 5:18:28 AM #24:	rogerskg1979 posted... You would still need street lanes. You would need some kind of street lanes in the air, although I am not sure how that would work. Not if it's 100% automated. You'd just have flight paths for certain altitudes and detection. rogerskg1979 posted... For example, what if someone is flying to the west while you're flying north, and you're about to intersect? Who has right-of-way? You still need streets and rules and traffic lights/signs, etc in the air. Again, you're kinda forgetting that you have multiple altitudes to work with. It's not like streets where everything operates solely on one level. rogerskg1979 posted... Storms, especially winds, would affect a flying car more than a driving car. Winds can rock a car and make it difficult to steer, and that becomes even more so flying in the air. Airplanes get around storms by flying above the clouds, but cars won't fly that high. Airplanes can still be grounded at the airport if the weather is bad, and it is too dangerous for them to take off. Again, wouldn't be steering and there would likely be contingencies for stuff like that. There might even be ways of limiting the impact of weather. rogerskg1979 posted... Greater speed? LOL That's how accidents happen. Again, no. Accidents are the result of user errors while traveling fast. Automated systems wouldn't really have that as an issue. There was that video about frictionless traffic a while ago which kinda illustrates how much better things run when automated systems are involved. rogerskg1979 posted... You seem to think that there won't be streets, rules, traffics lights/signs, etc and that you can just fly as fast as you want anywhere you want. You do realize that this won't be the case, right? If everyone has flying cars, traffic in the air is going to be as bad as it is on the ground, and you will have traffic jams and such in the air. There will still be "rush hour" to get to work in the morning. Flying at a greater speed seems even more dangerous than driving at a greater speed. You realize that nothing of what you said will likely be the case, right? You've somehow assumed that everybody would travel at the same altitude while doing whatever. In reality, the greatest inefficiency today is bottlenecking on roads because you only have so many lanes and you have drivers causing friction. An automated system with multiple altitudes basically renders all of your complaints obsolete. Mead posted... The biggest issue with flying cars is that youd have to construct flying garages to store them --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. <cite>Zeus posted [p:910499196] in It's 2018,... [t:77069159]...</cite> <quote><cite>rogerskg1979 posted...</cite> <quote>You would still need street lanes. You would need some kind of street lanes in the air, although I am not sure how that would work. </quote> Not if it's 100% automated. You'd just have flight paths for certain altitudes and detection. <cite>rogerskg1979 posted...</cite> <quote>For example, what if someone is flying to the west while you're flying north, and you're about to intersect? Who has right-of-way? You still need streets and rules and traffic lights/signs, etc in the air.</quote> Again, you're kinda forgetting that you have multiple altitudes to work with. It's not like streets where everything operates solely on one level. <cite>rogerskg1979 posted...</cite> <quote>Storms, especially winds, would affect a flying car more than a driving car. Winds can rock a car and make it difficult to steer, and that becomes even more so flying in the air. Airplanes get around storms by flying above the clouds, but cars won't fly that high. Airplanes can still be grounded at the airport if the weather is bad, and it is too dangerous for them to take off.</quote> Again, wouldn't be steering and there would likely be contingencies for stuff like that. There might even be ways of limiting the impact of weather. <cite>rogerskg1979 posted...</cite> <quote>Greater speed? LOL That's how accidents happen. </quote> Again, no. Accidents are the result of user errors while traveling fast. Automated systems wouldn't really have that as an issue. There was that video about frictionless traffic a while ago which kinda illustrates how much better things run when automated systems are involved. <cite>rogerskg1979 posted...</cite> <quote>You seem to think that there won't be streets, rules, traffics lights/signs, etc and that you can just fly as fast as you want anywhere you want. You do realize that this won't be the case, right? If everyone has flying cars, traffic in the air is going to be as bad as it is on the ground, and you will have traffic jams and such in the air. There will still be "rush hour" to get to work in the morning. Flying at a greater speed seems even more dangerous than driving at a greater speed.</quote> You realize that nothing of what you said will likely be the case, right? You've somehow assumed that everybody would travel at the same altitude while doing whatever. In reality, the greatest inefficiency today is bottlenecking on roads because you only have so many lanes and you have drivers causing friction. An automated system with multiple altitudes basically renders all of your complaints obsolete. <cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>The biggest issue with flying cars is that youd have to construct flying garages to store them</quote> --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1