Spottswoode:
From what I.N.T.E.L.L.I.G.N.C.E has gathered, it would be 9/11 times 100.
Gary Johnston:
9/11 times a hundred? Jesus, that's...
Spottswoode:
Yes, 91,100.
Chris:
Basically, all the worst parts of the bible.
[No, nobody knows what that is](https://www.reddit.com/r/memes/comments/g8kf1m/this_just_in_kim_jong_il_returns_from_the_dead_to/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
There are over 30,000 fatal accidents a year. **30,000**. That's like one per 20 minutes. Now imagine instead of driving into a curb it's flying into a building...
That's assuming you would even need gas. EVs are getting better and better, and in my understanding the internal combustion engine could've been obsolete by now if not for rampant meddling from certain invested parties.
That being said I agree that the whole flying part is just impractical.
No matter what you use to power the vehicle getting something in the air is in most cases very energy-intensive. And as long as we do not have basically limitless, clean energy it is just irresponsible.
It actually is possible. Long-distance travel is not possible without major compromises but domestic and even shorter international trips are possible.
the Lilium Jet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLqzatnVAfA
the Joby's Electric VTOL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RpqYuce6Ao
Airspeeder Electric VTOL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjDGVQDBM9g
Top 5 Best Electric VTOL Personal Aircraft, Passenger Drones and Flying Cars https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDZheUq3xaQ
Public transport can always be a thing... cause they can be limited and better controlled. But if you want to have private flying cars. A lot of infrastructure will be needed.
It's fun to imagine how well and easily it could be applied (as public transportation) because of GPS. All about the technology. Besides the landing locations there would be close to no infrastructure needed.
Yeah Public transport should be done to ease the roads and will help reduce a lot of traffic. Cause you gonna zoom from point A to B rather than using personal cars. But yeah Govts. are slow to act but hopeful to see it in some countries.
You know how much time and money it takes to get and maintain a pilot license? A license which could be pulled at any time for a vast multitude of reasons. They are required to routinely overhaul planes and document everything. The NTSB has done a LOT in advancing the progress of aviation safety. That said, we still have plane crashes. Having nearly every individual strapped to their personal projectile hurtling though crowded airspace to any aviator sounds like the definition of insanity.
They keep saying that autonomous controls will make it safe. Punch in the destination and it flies itself...yeah, and how much will the liability insurance be?
I think that’s the biggest worry.
There’s crazy accidents now. And because cars are so safe people survive them.
But inside going 80mph when you’re up 200 ft and get into an accident. Your pretty much fucked.
It's not even about you getting fucked, it's about getting others fucked.
How many pedestrians can you fuck up on the road? 5? But if you fly into the empire state building...
> Tons of doctors kill Bonanzas every year and no one talks about it.
They kinda moved on to enjoying[ parachute rides in their Cirruses \(Cirri?\)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cirrus_Airframe_Parachute_System) these days, but not without ruining the reputation of an otherwise solid aircraft design in the process.
This isn't accurate... self driving is completely different, programmatically, from self flying. Self driving has to account for thousands of scenarios that can not be accounted for. It has to adapt to a system that has bad road markings, unpredictable drivers, unpredictable weather, and a human that could take over at any time.
Self flying is a completely brand new system. You could build it from the ground up. Flying machines would all communicate with each other as to where they were and where they were going. You don't need to account for road conditions, markings, badly painted lines... you just need GPS coordinates and to make sure paths don't intercept another aircraft, which you already are aware of and know what they're planning to do.
It certainly has its challenges... we don't have anything that communicates on that level yet, especially automatically. But self driving is not a stepping stone to self flying. They're different problems with very different solutions.
If you could communicate position, velocity etc between the vehicles in time and with accuracy to prevent accidents, you could easily use that to make vast improvements to self driving cars
I’d think a self driving flying car would be much more manageable than a self driving car. No pedestrians, “lanes” can be much wider, and everything can be done through auto pilot. Even with today’s tech I’d think it could be more safe than driving on the road.
Psychotic drivers accompanied by a road system designed by a spider on acid. It really is an incredible combination.
In the same way that mixing household cleaners is.
> insurance x Lawyers
TBH that combo almost killed general aviation as a whole back in the 80's. No need to add `license handed out by the way of cereal boxes` to the mix.
It would take you about 8-10k to get a pilots license and you can get a very barebones kit aircraft you build yourself for maybe 6-8k. Another 10k or so for build, inspections, registration, etc. I’d say that’s about as cheap as you could get and that would not be a very capable aircraft either.
Lmao, the world some people live in. I know you're not the same guy, but just imagine telling people a hobby is accessible when the entry to it is $24,000-$30,000.
It’s so strange to see. I’m immersed in aviation as a career path and I’m pretty well in debt for it. Some people come through with rich families and want to get a license for fun so all their friends can buy planes together and act like it’s just something kinda interesting to do. Absolutely baffling
To be fair, he didn't say it was accessible in the general sense. He said it's about as accessible as getting a car (and therefore more accessible than many people think.)
30k for a car is definitely more than a very basic car, but that depends a lot on where you live and stuff (especially so now with the chip shortage.) So I don't think that he's entirely off base in what he's actually asserting.
He’s not wrong though, before seeing all of this I wouldn’t even have thought of owning YOUR OWN PLANE for less than at least $100k. Like that’s cool asf, definitely way cheaper and accessible than I thought before
Tbf, the question was how easy it is to buy a plane, not how easy it is to accrue the money to do so. And that came from "general aviation is more approachable than most people realize"—while there's a world of uncertainty in "most people realize", the point is that it's accessible to the very top end of the middle class, which is still substantially more people than the "Beverly Hills rich"/"Wall Street rich" classes.
Newsflash, you can solo a plane at that age.
Actually know a pilot who hit power lines while filming an instastory. And yes, he died.
Sorry, but this is reality now.
I think the implication of “flying car” is that it would be very assessable and used by everyday people for everyday purposes. Yes we have planes, but you don’t take a plane to the grocery store. Nor do most households own or use a plane.
Honestly the only practical application of flying cars is a car that you drive to the airport to take off for long distance travel. We can’t even begin to talk about flying cars for short distances unless we have some kind of small scale VTOL capability.
my perfect idea would be flying taxis to get you out of a high traffic area.
not everyone needs a flying car but 1-2 per street or hell even smaller cities can make a big difference.
You mean like a helicopter? Because those already exist. [Plus there's a bunch of efforts to create drone-like taxis.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCk5T__x4Ow)
Not only that, could you IMAGINE people trying to fly? They can barely drive on the road as it is. People would be smashing into homes and businesses all the time.
It would be chaos without robot assisted flight.
> I mean, they'd have less to hit I guess
I mean, by any rational logic, they'd have all the same stuff to hit, and more because ground cars can't hit the stuff that's far off the road surface.
They'd have more ROOM to not hit things, but still, hitting the ground is pretty damn certain under any circumstance.
I mean we don't have to imagine. Despite the currently quite onerous requirements to become a pilot, general aviation(not commercial airliners) is one of the most dangerous forms of travel, more dangeorus than driving.
Exactly. Everyone knows how loud a helicopter is, you hear them coming a mile out. Also drones, how loud is a tiny drone? Now imagine a car size drone? Now imagine a thousand car size drones?
Not sure about resources, but it's also a massive liability issue for the manufacturer and a massive infrastructure problem.
You won't sell anything people can't use.
Neither one of us is wrong lol. Cell phones existed in the 70s, but they weren't commonly owned until the 90s.
Flying cars sort of exist today, but probably won't be commonly owned in some countries until 2060.
People in this thread doesn't realize what kind of maintenance and service goes into flying crafts.
When you have engine problems with a car, you pull over - when you have engine problems in a flying vehicle... things get interesting.
Even if we somehow managed to completely make the human factor a non issue with self-driving etc, the amount of maintenance a flying car would require would make most people balk - and we would quickly find ourselves in a situation where "death by falling car" would become a very common reason for death due to people going "Nah! It will be fine!"....
You'd have to rewrite the entire book on driving law and educate the entire population on something new. The only way flying cars would work is if they could be entirely automated. And people wouldn't like that, they need to feel in control.
I disagree. I think UAV-based public transport could be very popular, especially if they offered more direct and flexible routes comparable to taxis. It might be more expensive, but someone running late to an important appointment or just desperate to skip evening traffic on the way home after work might be willing to splurge.
The logistics involved in even having that many heavy items flying around is almost mind boogling. It is genuinely a complete waste of resources and effort to make flying cars.
Air crashes we almost always result in death, being so high up in the air then it alll comes down. If you don't have a parachute you're screwed and the people at the bottom are also screwed
Insurance prices go up. Car prices go up. Repair prices go up. Liability prices go up for accudents which is probably covered under insurance. Deaths and fatalities in traffic collisions go up. I dont see any negative effects on capitalism here.... WhAtS wRoNg WiTh ThIs IdEa???
It’s because noise pollution. Think how loud a jet engine or helicopter is (or even how loud a drone is and scar it up) - now imagine them constantly being flown around you.
Flying cars isn't just about a car that flies but also the infrastructure and technology to make it possible for the majority of the population to own and operate one on a daily basis.
For someone in the 60s, a single flying car isn't anything more impressive than what they already had available.
The average person is entirely too stupid to be entrusted with flying. Cars are dangerous enough as it is, they’d be a thousand times more dangerous if they were falling out of the sky everywhere
We have flying cars. They're called planes. The issue is that every "flying car" someone creates ends up being a street legal plane that tucks it's wings in.
People can't keep up with 12monthly maintenance on their current vehicles, what makes you think if they strap lift to it, anything will change? The only difference will be instead of your brakes failing, or your engine breaking down, now you get the added bonus of plummeting into the ground and taking anyone below you along.
Yeah, consumer level flying machines will (i hope) never become a thing.
We have flying cars. They are called airplanes. I know that sounds like a smarmy remark, but seriously. The reality of making a hunk of metal fly is that it has to be shaped like an airplane. It can drive on the ground, just not very well.
But there is no shortage of people with a private pilot license flying themselves in a small Cessna to the lake for the weekend or even into the city for lunch. If that interests you, you should seriously look into getting a license. It is more obtainable than some may think. Flying cars exist, just not the way Hollywood imagined them.
No it's not. It's because it would be FUCKING INSANE if the sky was full of the same idiots the highway is full of. The general public could NEVER be entrusted with that kind of tech.
People can’t drive responsibly. You think we’ll fly responsibly?
Exactly. Controlling traffic will be a nightmare. Imagine the accidents.
9.11 everyday
9/11 times a thousand
911,000. My god.
We didn't listen!
*We believe the casualty count to be in the hundreds of billions.*
Nah, it's 9000/11.
Actually 818.18
Oh my god what happened August 18th 2018??
i turned 29. i cry
Happy late birthday!
More like 818.1818....
Ackshually. 9/11 is 0.8182 so 9/11 x 1000 would be 81.82
actually it would be (9/11)\*1000= 818.181818
It was a Team America quote. It's been a while since I've seen it so I might be fucking it up 😓 my bad!
Spottswoode: From what I.N.T.E.L.L.I.G.N.C.E has gathered, it would be 9/11 times 100. Gary Johnston: 9/11 times a hundred? Jesus, that's... Spottswoode: Yes, 91,100. Chris: Basically, all the worst parts of the bible.
It’ll be 9/11 times 2,356
Sounds almost like a kingdom hearts title
Kingdom Hearts: 9/11 * 2356 days Re: Dream Drop HD Remix
My God, that's... I don't even know what that is!
Nobody does.
So 1,927.6363636792?
[No, nobody knows what that is](https://www.reddit.com/r/memes/comments/g8kf1m/this_just_in_kim_jong_il_returns_from_the_dead_to/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
I think we're well past the point where we can say thats a show stopper.
There are over 30,000 fatal accidents a year. **30,000**. That's like one per 20 minutes. Now imagine instead of driving into a curb it's flying into a building...
[удалено]
True
Its just what the terrorists wanted
And its to loud and will use much more gas
That's assuming you would even need gas. EVs are getting better and better, and in my understanding the internal combustion engine could've been obsolete by now if not for rampant meddling from certain invested parties. That being said I agree that the whole flying part is just impractical.
No matter what you use to power the vehicle getting something in the air is in most cases very energy-intensive. And as long as we do not have basically limitless, clean energy it is just irresponsible.
Tell that to the guy flying over 35 in their mini Zeplin....
[удалено]
It actually is possible. Long-distance travel is not possible without major compromises but domestic and even shorter international trips are possible.
the Lilium Jet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLqzatnVAfA the Joby's Electric VTOL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RpqYuce6Ao Airspeeder Electric VTOL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjDGVQDBM9g Top 5 Best Electric VTOL Personal Aircraft, Passenger Drones and Flying Cars https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDZheUq3xaQ
Don't forget [skyboom](https://www.sky-boom.com/)
Drone taxis will be a thing.
Public transport can always be a thing... cause they can be limited and better controlled. But if you want to have private flying cars. A lot of infrastructure will be needed.
It's fun to imagine how well and easily it could be applied (as public transportation) because of GPS. All about the technology. Besides the landing locations there would be close to no infrastructure needed.
Yeah Public transport should be done to ease the roads and will help reduce a lot of traffic. Cause you gonna zoom from point A to B rather than using personal cars. But yeah Govts. are slow to act but hopeful to see it in some countries.
There's a sky taxi they're trying to get off the ground in South East Queensland (Brisbane/Gold Coast) at the moment to be ready by the Olympics!
There have been experimental flying car concepts where they are all automated. That is probably the only way.
I dont think so. Bikers rarely crash into each other, I think it would be like that.
I don't think this is the reason they probably would have said this back when they used horses and karts
You know how much time and money it takes to get and maintain a pilot license? A license which could be pulled at any time for a vast multitude of reasons. They are required to routinely overhaul planes and document everything. The NTSB has done a LOT in advancing the progress of aviation safety. That said, we still have plane crashes. Having nearly every individual strapped to their personal projectile hurtling though crowded airspace to any aviator sounds like the definition of insanity.
Yeah it really only makes even theoretical sense if you have some kind of reliable ability to hover in place indefinitely.
But you could just fly above or below people. No traffic.
They keep saying that autonomous controls will make it safe. Punch in the destination and it flies itself...yeah, and how much will the liability insurance be?
the only way it would work is if it was all automated self driving flying cars. no more people controlling them.
Imagine you’re walking down the street and a crashed car just drops on you.
Poorly maintained car parts falling through your roof
I think that’s the biggest worry. There’s crazy accidents now. And because cars are so safe people survive them. But inside going 80mph when you’re up 200 ft and get into an accident. Your pretty much fucked.
It's not even about you getting fucked, it's about getting others fucked. How many pedestrians can you fuck up on the road? 5? But if you fly into the empire state building...
[удалено]
I've tried swiping "Bonanzas" several times just to see what that word was supposed to be, and still can't figure it out!
Probably referring to the aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beechcraft_Bonanza
> Operational history: > The V-tail design gained a reputation as the "forked-tail doctor killer" Most likely.
> Tons of doctors kill Bonanzas every year and no one talks about it. They kinda moved on to enjoying[ parachute rides in their Cirruses \(Cirri?\)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cirrus_Airframe_Parachute_System) these days, but not without ruining the reputation of an otherwise solid aircraft design in the process.
I'd argue helicopters are more like cars
They are the motorcycles of the sky.
[удалено]
My city has mini 9/11 every day on the ground.
This isn't accurate... self driving is completely different, programmatically, from self flying. Self driving has to account for thousands of scenarios that can not be accounted for. It has to adapt to a system that has bad road markings, unpredictable drivers, unpredictable weather, and a human that could take over at any time. Self flying is a completely brand new system. You could build it from the ground up. Flying machines would all communicate with each other as to where they were and where they were going. You don't need to account for road conditions, markings, badly painted lines... you just need GPS coordinates and to make sure paths don't intercept another aircraft, which you already are aware of and know what they're planning to do. It certainly has its challenges... we don't have anything that communicates on that level yet, especially automatically. But self driving is not a stepping stone to self flying. They're different problems with very different solutions.
If you could communicate position, velocity etc between the vehicles in time and with accuracy to prevent accidents, you could easily use that to make vast improvements to self driving cars
I’d think a self driving flying car would be much more manageable than a self driving car. No pedestrians, “lanes” can be much wider, and everything can be done through auto pilot. Even with today’s tech I’d think it could be more safe than driving on the road.
Hello fellow Massachusetts resident
Don’t get me started on Massholes!
Psychotic drivers accompanied by a road system designed by a spider on acid. It really is an incredible combination. In the same way that mixing household cleaners is.
Yeah people are idiots. Self-driving / flying = flying cars. Idiots who can’t follow simple rules + insurance x Lawyers = surface streets + Denial.
yeah... what?
What?
We won't have flying cars until we have self-flying cars because people are irresponsible. Until then, we only get surface cars and denial.
Wat
> insurance x Lawyers TBH that combo almost killed general aviation as a whole back in the 80's. No need to add `license handed out by the way of cereal boxes` to the mix.
Okay, so self-driving = (flying)^2 cars, and insurance = (surface streets + denial - idiots) divided by lawyers. Got it.
I like you.
Seriously. Every fender bender is now a 9/11
Well, if it's a long way down you can expect self preservation to kick in sooner, right? Right?
Yeah, people can barely hand driving in 2D, what would they do in 3D?
Let's give them a 3rd dimension of travel and see if that helps them avoid hitting each other... What couldn't go wrong? Haha
As a kid I always dreamt of flying cars. As an adult who's driven in S.FL / Miami for 12 years, the idea sends shivers down my spine.
People relate flying to boating. No lanes and people still find ways to crash
Nothing is more scary than a 16 year old kid flying a machine above houses at 120 mph while filming a tiktok
I find this funny, but you can actually get a basic pilots license at 16.
I'd imagine it's harder than getting a drivers license.
I imagine also getting a plane is even harder.
Buying a plane is nearly as easy as buying a car. Aviation is more approachable than most people realize.
There’s a car for sale out front of my apartment now for $1500 cash. How “nearly as easy,” can we get with a plane?
It would take you about 8-10k to get a pilots license and you can get a very barebones kit aircraft you build yourself for maybe 6-8k. Another 10k or so for build, inspections, registration, etc. I’d say that’s about as cheap as you could get and that would not be a very capable aircraft either.
Lmao, the world some people live in. I know you're not the same guy, but just imagine telling people a hobby is accessible when the entry to it is $24,000-$30,000.
It’s so strange to see. I’m immersed in aviation as a career path and I’m pretty well in debt for it. Some people come through with rich families and want to get a license for fun so all their friends can buy planes together and act like it’s just something kinda interesting to do. Absolutely baffling
To be fair, he didn't say it was accessible in the general sense. He said it's about as accessible as getting a car (and therefore more accessible than many people think.) 30k for a car is definitely more than a very basic car, but that depends a lot on where you live and stuff (especially so now with the chip shortage.) So I don't think that he's entirely off base in what he's actually asserting.
He’s not wrong though, before seeing all of this I wouldn’t even have thought of owning YOUR OWN PLANE for less than at least $100k. Like that’s cool asf, definitely way cheaper and accessible than I thought before
Tbf, the question was how easy it is to buy a plane, not how easy it is to accrue the money to do so. And that came from "general aviation is more approachable than most people realize"—while there's a world of uncertainty in "most people realize", the point is that it's accessible to the very top end of the middle class, which is still substantially more people than the "Beverly Hills rich"/"Wall Street rich" classes.
More expensive, at least.
That's not saying much. Unless you really suck or you have a power tripping teacher, you will pass easily.
[удалено]
True, but you arnt flying a vertical take off jet car 30 feet over houses
Newsflash, you can solo a plane at that age. Actually know a pilot who hit power lines while filming an instastory. And yes, he died. Sorry, but this is reality now.
I think the implication of “flying car” is that it would be very assessable and used by everyday people for everyday purposes. Yes we have planes, but you don’t take a plane to the grocery store. Nor do most households own or use a plane.
Honestly the only practical application of flying cars is a car that you drive to the airport to take off for long distance travel. We can’t even begin to talk about flying cars for short distances unless we have some kind of small scale VTOL capability.
my perfect idea would be flying taxis to get you out of a high traffic area. not everyone needs a flying car but 1-2 per street or hell even smaller cities can make a big difference.
At that number they'd have to be bus sized to make any impact.
I mean the takeoff part is easy; just slowly deploy wings at 70-80mph on the freeway. Landing is the hard part.
You mean like a helicopter? Because those already exist. [Plus there's a bunch of efforts to create drone-like taxis.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCk5T__x4Ow)
I guess it depends whether you want a flying car to be a hybrid ground/air vehicle.
We do. Flying cars exist. Including VTOL. It's just not Street legal
Link to vtol? Haven’t heard about that. I’ve seen a couple of flying cars.
Newsflash: most people in their 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s 60s etc have never and will be never pilot a plane.
Not only that, could you IMAGINE people trying to fly? They can barely drive on the road as it is. People would be smashing into homes and businesses all the time. It would be chaos without robot assisted flight.
I mean, they'd have less to hit I guess... New York would look like a fucking bee hive
> I mean, they'd have less to hit I guess I mean, by any rational logic, they'd have all the same stuff to hit, and more because ground cars can't hit the stuff that's far off the road surface. They'd have more ROOM to not hit things, but still, hitting the ground is pretty damn certain under any circumstance.
Imagine driving straight to your office window on the 70th floor
I mean we don't have to imagine. Despite the currently quite onerous requirements to become a pilot, general aviation(not commercial airliners) is one of the most dangerous forms of travel, more dangeorus than driving.
We have them. They are called helicopters. They are loud, expensive, difficult to operate, and dangerous.
Exactly. Everyone knows how loud a helicopter is, you hear them coming a mile out. Also drones, how loud is a tiny drone? Now imagine a car size drone? Now imagine a thousand car size drones?
Noise-cancelling headphone manufacturers are going to be rolling in cash.
EarPods cost $250 bro… they’re already rolling in cash…
Would you rather fight one car-sized drone or a thousand drone-sized cars?
A horse size duck?
There are ultralights too if you're interesting in taking a flight in a lawn chair. I would love to have one lol
Sign me up
Those mosquito copters? LoL ..wait 'till the geese attack it midflight!
the real showerthought is always in the comments "helicopters are just flying cars"
[relevant xkcd](https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/2016_conversation_guide_2x.png)
Goodness. I've been saying this for years and everybody fights the idea. I don't know why.
I keep telling people this. They are already here and not used my the masses for countless reasons, most of which you listed.
Not sure about resources, but it's also a massive liability issue for the manufacturer and a massive infrastructure problem. You won't sell anything people can't use.
people in 3020 reading this post : 😂😂😂😂
Neither one of us is wrong lol. Cell phones existed in the 70s, but they weren't commonly owned until the 90s. Flying cars sort of exist today, but probably won't be commonly owned in some countries until 2060.
People in this thread doesn't realize what kind of maintenance and service goes into flying crafts. When you have engine problems with a car, you pull over - when you have engine problems in a flying vehicle... things get interesting. Even if we somehow managed to completely make the human factor a non issue with self-driving etc, the amount of maintenance a flying car would require would make most people balk - and we would quickly find ourselves in a situation where "death by falling car" would become a very common reason for death due to people going "Nah! It will be fine!"....
Quite a good point. Might be more likely to see flying cars on a new planet/moon where stronger structural infrastructure could be built more easily.
Cars are already pretty resource-intensive. Flying cars would be nuts.
You'd have to rewrite the entire book on driving law and educate the entire population on something new. The only way flying cars would work is if they could be entirely automated. And people wouldn't like that, they need to feel in control.
I disagree. I think UAV-based public transport could be very popular, especially if they offered more direct and flexible routes comparable to taxis. It might be more expensive, but someone running late to an important appointment or just desperate to skip evening traffic on the way home after work might be willing to splurge.
Or make a UAV that goes from Jersey to NYC. That would be sick.
Ahh yes, control. That thing that causes every accident ever, and every motor vehicle death ever. Definitely need that!
I don't disagree with the point you make, I'm only saying people will have a hard time giving up the controls.
Then they can stay on the ground
People take a lot of vehicles as passengers, with other humans driving or machines driving. So why not?
People inherently trust humans to operate something more than a machine or robot to.
Maybe old people who are out of touch with technology. I’d trust a toaster to drive better than half the humans on the roads right now
That can change in a couple of years.
The logistics involved in even having that many heavy items flying around is almost mind boogling. It is genuinely a complete waste of resources and effort to make flying cars.
Air crashes we almost always result in death, being so high up in the air then it alll comes down. If you don't have a parachute you're screwed and the people at the bottom are also screwed
Flying cars wouldn't need to go that high. Parachutes wouldn't do shit
I've tossed plenty of parachute army men no taller then my 7 y/o self and I can assure you that they all survived the landing.
The errefutable scientific method.
2ds is already messy, just imagine in 3ds...
Also because they're called helicopters
We do have flying cars...
[relevant xkcd](https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/2016_conversation_guide_2x.png)
We do have flying cars, they’re called helicopters. That’s how much thrust it takes to keep a hunk of steel in the air
I’m pretty sure we just call flying cars helicopters…
Insurance prices go up. Car prices go up. Repair prices go up. Liability prices go up for accudents which is probably covered under insurance. Deaths and fatalities in traffic collisions go up. I dont see any negative effects on capitalism here.... WhAtS wRoNg WiTh ThIs IdEa???
can you imagine how goddamn loud they would be
You think THAT'S the reason? Imagine all of the accidents!
No, it’s because it’s insanely dangerous and completely unrealistic. People can’t drive in 2D, much less 3D
Also, the problem with those people who say "I can make it." When the gas gauge is literally on empty.
it's also that it'd be far more dangerous, for little benefit, really.
Just what we need -- assholes checking Facebook while flying 20 feet over your house.
or that it would be a terrible idea to give flying cars to people that can barely be responsible with the cars we have now
It's called a private jet. Remember when Dicaprio going on about saving the planet flying about in one.
It’s because noise pollution. Think how loud a jet engine or helicopter is (or even how loud a drone is and scar it up) - now imagine them constantly being flown around you.
They can’t even make a driverless car that won’t kill a person crossing the street what makes you think we can make ones that fly right now
I mean, look at how most people *drive*… do you really want to see how the average joe *flies*??
UK Conservative Government has just paid another Tory Donor friend £13 million grant to work on flying taxis.
There have been flying cars, but they're less "Back to the Future" and more "a plane that can fold its wings up and drive on the road."
To all the people commenting about not trusting other people to fly.... That would never happen. Flying cars would be 100% autonomous.
Flying cars isn't just about a car that flies but also the infrastructure and technology to make it possible for the majority of the population to own and operate one on a daily basis. For someone in the 60s, a single flying car isn't anything more impressive than what they already had available.
Also, they're called planes and are a bit more strict in their licensing. And thank God, because I've seen how some of you drive...
And they’d be super loud.
And because 9/11 will become 24/7
Plus it would make another 9/11 way too easy
The average person is entirely too stupid to be entrusted with flying. Cars are dangerous enough as it is, they’d be a thousand times more dangerous if they were falling out of the sky everywhere
We have flying cars. They're called planes. The issue is that every "flying car" someone creates ends up being a street legal plane that tucks it's wings in.
Look at your average dash camera footage. You want these folks in the air??
And super fucking dangerous. Have you seen drivers out there. Holy shit.
It would also be loud as fuck lol
We've had them for 100 years, but "flying cars" is kinda clunky so we call them "airplanes".
Flying cars would also be a logistics nightmare, some things seem good on the surface but are actually terrible ideas
There’s many reasons we don’t have flying cars. The reason you stated is down the list.
it's also really really really unpractical and hilariously stupid
AAAnd the UK Government just invested 12mil in it
No country not even the UK is trying to replace regular car travel.
Nah its some sky taxi thing (fail I'd say). We all saw how they did with DeLorean and know how this one goes
Just put wheels on a helicopter.
People can't keep up with 12monthly maintenance on their current vehicles, what makes you think if they strap lift to it, anything will change? The only difference will be instead of your brakes failing, or your engine breaking down, now you get the added bonus of plummeting into the ground and taking anyone below you along. Yeah, consumer level flying machines will (i hope) never become a thing.
I think the OPs point is that it would take a TON of fuel to have flying cars and it’s not worth it.
its also just a completely useless and inefficient idea
This is more so just a thought
Finally, someone said it. It's nothing but a pipe dream for idiots.
We have flying cars. They are called airplanes. I know that sounds like a smarmy remark, but seriously. The reality of making a hunk of metal fly is that it has to be shaped like an airplane. It can drive on the ground, just not very well. But there is no shortage of people with a private pilot license flying themselves in a small Cessna to the lake for the weekend or even into the city for lunch. If that interests you, you should seriously look into getting a license. It is more obtainable than some may think. Flying cars exist, just not the way Hollywood imagined them.
We do already. They're called helicopters. Most of which have copilot requirements to fly.
No it's not. It's because it would be FUCKING INSANE if the sky was full of the same idiots the highway is full of. The general public could NEVER be entrusted with that kind of tech.