• kaprap@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    21 hours ago

    These should only be allowed in ordinary flight zones, far away from any buildings it may smash into.

    The CPC will likely never approve of anything similar to this anywhere near residential, industrial or commercial zones due to the danger it represents

    Plus, the use of these flying cars are essentially the same as Helicopters

    • acosmichippo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      also cities should have public transit anyway. what a massive waste of energy it is to fly people hundreds of feet UP before then even go anywhere.

      • WanderingThoughts@europe.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        19 hours ago

        These articles also never mention how this is going to work in the fabric of a city.

        Say optimistically a 15 second separation between vehicles, 4 passengers per vehicle, means one ¨sky-lane¨ can transport 60/15 * 60 * 4 => about 1000 people per lane. That´s worse than a car lane, and an order of magnitude behind bicycle lanes and subways. You can stack multiple lanes vertically, but then it becomes more fun with traffic control for take-off and landing and still a bicycle lane transports more people.

        So far these things seem better as a city hopper, or used in a rural setting, but the current ones don´t have the range for that either.