>>14202165 >$200,000 minimum price >controlled via tablet >20-30 minute battery time, who knows how long it takes to recharge this sucker (wouldn't be a big problem if you could swap the battery out for a fully charged one, but these are more likely internal batteries) >in case of emergency, the company itself takes control of said copter
I see this as being useful for very rich businessmen in China's cities, so they can literally fly over traffic without needing 20 or so minutes to prep a common helicopter for takeoff. This shit would take years to get through America and Europe's air regulations systems, and they would need to include a hell of a lot more stuff to convince not only the government but also the public that this is safe.
>>14202084 Moller's a scam m8, he's been hyping this shit for over 30 years and the last time he made any flight with it (only once) was 2003, when he lifted a jawgaping 10 feet off the ground for an amazing 10 minutes. All tethered too, you know, just in case.
After decades of supposed research, he and his company quite literally have nothing to show for it. They feed off of gullible investors who don't know better and chinese businessmen who know just as much as the investors.
>>14202084 >Leaving your average driver in charge of operating complex machinery that needs meticulous maintenance, pre-flight checks and adds control over a whole new axis of rotation while traveling What could possibly go wrong.
>>14202760 >muh oppressive government administrations >seriously wanting millions of absolute retards to turn the air above your head into a living hell How can you expect the average person to fly a plane after seeing the average person fail to drive a car properly?
What, because the hypothetical year of 2001 is gone now?
I mean, we can still do something about, and many groups are. What we'll see in the next 10-15 years will be unlike anything before.
>>14202801 Wanna know why that whole space age thing ended up not happening then?
Congress felt uncomfortable about how much money NASA was using as a civilian space program, so they began slashing their budget after 1966. A Nuclear-Thermal rocket that was in testing was cancelled because of a lack of funding. They were only able to make a handful of Apollos and Saturn rockets after the mid 60s, and the last were used in the mid 70s for the Apollo-Soyuz.
NASA began planning a Saturn successor in the late 60s and early 70s that would shuttle stuff from launchpads to space, and this would be the space shuttle, a revolutionary new cargo transportation system. It would be able to be not only highly reusable but also be able to be launched again within a week or two. Nixon gave the initial funding for development in 1972, but as the 70s got worse Congress was unconvinced and had their hand hovering over the plug. NASA had to convince them, so they decided to partner with the military to create a space shuttle that could be used for defense launches as well. As this happened, the shuttle became more and more complex until it was a bureaucratically bloated mess, but NASA was not going to give up and have no manned rocket.
In the early 80s they were highly defensive and highly delusional. They forced all private and government space launches through the Shuttle, and tried making the Shuttle the thing they dreamed of in the 70s. Challenger happened, the military backed out, but NASA still forced most private launches in the US to go through the Shuttle, which really didn't change until after Columbia was destroyed in 2003.
>>14202841 >A Nuclear-Thermal rocket that was in testing was cancelled because of a lack of funding.
It was more than that, since there was also a burgeoning environmental movement generally opposed to nuclear power along with people getting bored with space in general after the Apollo program. If people gave a shit about space or science in general, Congress wouldn't have started reducing their budget so heavily.
>>14202855 >Nasa has been shady as shit with the funding they recieve since day 1
>>14202855 NASA is pretty transparent about what they do spend their money on. They have to be. It's kinda hard to convince people to go to space if you don't tell them what's up there or how you plan to get it.
They also end up with old military equipment to use as test vehicles, so on the ground, they look a lot better-funded than they are.
>>14202684 >saw an article about a woman who saw her son for the first time in twenty years after she had lost her sight when he was born after receiving a bionic implant >scientists already figured out a type of interface that can allow prosthetics and implants to receive direct signals from nerves >the fucking internet that lets you constantly swallow the propaganda you're tossing around >cars that are 300 HP and still get 25+ MPG >handheld communicators as powerful as computers that aren't even a decade old
But it's the truth. We could be 15+ years ahead of are current technology but the military in countries that develop technology get more funding. But fuck off you political fag, you're fucked when you think your ideals are more important than the truth.
>>14203410 The Space Race was more of a show of which side was more technologically advanced, Sputnik for example was a demonstration that nuclear weapons didn't need bombers to be deployed and could go anywhere in the world in a short time.
After the US reached the moon, both the public and politicians thought it was pointless to keep going as they had already demonstrated their point and they felt there were more pressing issues to deal with at home. I guess what they thought was that some private business would eventually step up and kick off the real space age, but that ended up not happening for another 5 decades.
The environmentalist movement wasn't too huge around the time of the Saturn program. It was mostly connected to the counterculture, until incidents like the Polluted River catching fire made national headlines, and the famous Blue Marble image taken of the Earth from one of the Apollos.
Nuclear power itself was treated largely with indifference until later in the 70s, when it came to light that many of the plants were not as safe as they were assumed to be by the public, and Three Mile Island confirmed their fears that it was dangerous. While that factors in somewhat to why it is in decline in the West today, other major reasons include that western governments no longer have a real interest in them (their interest in the Cold War was that they could use the enrichment to make nuclear weapons), and that they simply aren't cost-competitive compared to some of their more favored alternatives, like natural gas.
In the end, the reason why NERVA was cancelled falls down to Congress not wanting to spend the money for it. They didn't want to continue the Space Race, and evidently the Russians didn't either after Korolev died and his prized N1 failed.
>>14202258 >This shit would take years to get through America and Europe's air regulations systems, and they would need to include a hell of a lot more stuff to convince not only the government but also the public that this is safe.
Unless they could get it to fall under the 'ultralight' aircraft classification. In the U.S. that means it would have to be under 254 lbs empty which it's obviously quite a bit above that right now.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.