Friends, we're all aware of the impending doom autonomous

>Imagine the roads being free of rich soccer mom's in their SUVs and rich asians in Mercedes.

Yep, they will all be in the air....above us...while we eat.....sleep....minding our own business....crashing into each other........falling down on us.

Lets not forget about the allah snackbars.

>that picture
It's not a car if it can't drive on the roads

If it can only fly and not drive, it's a fucking airplane.

Or a helicopter.

I for one don't give a shit because I live in rural Australia

fifty year olds with beer guts will still tbone other cars coming out of intersections because they can't be fucked to look up from their candy crush game
but this time the car and its lardass contents fall onto your head at 9.8 N/kg
god bless

>>16511352
>teh terriss gun take are freedoms
ROFL

Are you people honestly this fucking retarded? All of those fucksticks already have access to personal airplanes and they don't go around fucking shit up all the time. Flying cars aren't for drivers to be able to fly, it's for pilots to be able to drive the same vehicle they just flew. Airplanes have a maintenance schedule monitored by the FAA, THE FUCKING FEDS. Why would the flying car (or roadable aircraft) be any. fucking. different? And if you do get some rich fuckup that doesn't put fucking oil in the engine do you know what happens? HE FUCKING DIES WHEN IT CRASHES. And I'm not even talking about autonomous ones. The point of the autonomous ones is so the soccer moms, slant eyes, & admiral akbars CAN'T FUCKING CONTROL IT THEMSELVES. They put in a location & it FUCKING FLYS THEM THERE. NO. FUCKING. CONTROL. There's a reason they call you fucking /o/tists.

also
>2 of the 3 companies use manual

t. one of the people actually making one

I hope it works out the way you say, OP.

>mfw socal canyon roads get turned into a giant track

And for that matter if autonomous road cars work out for the worst at least we'll have ultralights.

>>16511352
>>16511410
Haha but you forgot, they won't be allowed to drive. It's autonomous.

>>16511360
Literally what I was thinking, that's why I said "cars". They're obviously aircraft

>>16511762
As long as we don't have both. But I honestly can't see the benefit of having an electric autonomous car over an electric autonomous "flying car" if you can still go to all the same places. So hopefully the autonomous car won't go too far.

Flying "cars" have too many variables inherent in their design and they won't be viable until science is advanced to futurama-tier "might as well be magic." Because they'd be small, the huge weight differences between 1 to 4 passengers and whether they're skinny or fat would affect the handling in a massive way. Because people are idiots, they'd have to have sophisticated true autopilot, no input from the drivers at all, or else you could only sell them to licensed pilots. And because of lackluster reliability inherent in the auto industry and the fact that ANY failure of almost any part would cause a fatal crash, they would need some over the top sensor suite that could detect when something is about to fail, and ground it before it happens. Then you'd have people mad that they have to spend so much on mechanic visits because "it was working perfectly fine and then my Check Wing light came on for no reason, I don't need repairs"
Also even at low elevations, as long as you're above the treetops, wind is a big issue. The autopilot would have to know how to compensate, or people simply wouldn't be allowed to fly in inclement weather.

Flying cars won't work with the tech we have now. We need anti-gravity drives and propulsion so overpowered that no amount of wind could knock the vehicle off-course, and maneuvering could be as precise as ground-based vehicles. We need VTOL without helicopter blades or jet engines. We need mechanical reliability on the level of sorcery.

>>16511785
>if you can still go to all the same places
big if. especially if electric ends up working for road vehicles but not for aircraft, which seems plausible.

>>16511785
Cost. Local taxi/rides are companies stay grounded to keep fleet costs down, and have a small fleet of aerocars for "premium" customers.

Airlines will love the fuck out of them cause it lets them pick up their high end customers straight from home to the airport and then on to their end destination in the most overly pompous and cushy vehicles ever fucking built

And then uuber can give you the option of paying 2x or 3x to get a flying car instead of a regular one and skip ground traffic

>>16511812
otoh, aircraft could keep infrastructure for gas alive even if cars don't, so that would be neat0

Better yet, we can remove so much of the unneeded tarmac with nature restoration or parks and the world will be so much more beautiful.

>>16511336
We Jak and Daxter now