Google is working on a flying car. http://www.bloomberg.com

Google is working on many things

post the helicopter vs flying car efficiency graph

>>8142522
I cant wait! Will it have Google Glass support?

>>8142545
Do SUV drivers give a shit about efficiency?

>>8142578
probably

>>8142522
yeesh. An unholy melding of airfoils and quad-copters. Power dies and you're dead, no glide modes.

File: VTOL_DiscLoad-LiftEfficiency.png (11KB, 323x303px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 323x303px

>>8142545
It's efficiency with disk loading. Google's vehicles appear to be capable of forward flight, which means increased efficiency. In general lower wing loading means more efficiency.

>>8142522
Looks about like what I thought long-range "racing quadcopters" should evolve into.

File: 783467349535.jpg (1MB, 3008x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3008x2000px

>>8142522
>2016
>still using Bernoulli's physics to fly
Fucking kek

>>8142522
>>8142578
>I'm leaving /sci/, goodbye, forever, I'll find a better forum, you guys don't understand my genius

you're a fucking joke. if you're still going to shit up this place at least remain anonymous so we can't spot you and start vomiting profusely

>>8142578
Having witnessed your transformation from anon into namefag, I have completely changed my stance on namefags. Go fuck yourself, attention-whore.

The problem with flying cars is regulatory

How hard would it be to make a plane that can take off/land at 80-100 kmh, and be only as wide as a traffic lane...

Flying Cars will never happen. The regulatory and liability hurdles are currently too high.

you can't even fly an ultralight helicopter anywhere resembling civilization or controlled air space.

>>8142894
>The regulatory and liability hurdles are currently too high.

Something which could be changed in an instant if you had a successful product, and a couple politicians supporting you
Liability is something that has needed to be fixed in the USA for a long fucking time

>>8142882
not hard. You can even get the landing and take off distances down to hundreds of feet.

>>8142882
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKSH2E5lNV8

File: salty.jpg (42KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 500x500px

>>8142858
>>8142872
I tripped this OP precisely to rustle you and boy did I succeed
>>8142897
This. If the automation works the legislation will bend. Legislation exists to cater to what is currently capable, it doesn't ignore new developments in aircraft control.

>>8142899
By hundreds of feet you mean like 50 huh?
But you don't care about stopping, its just transitioning from flying to roadway travel on your way home. Or roads could have designated "landing" lanes, similar to designated turning lanes.

I think you are shooting yourself in the foot trying to insist on vtol, vtol is dogshit.

>>8142911
VTOL can be improved.

>>8142911
>I think you are shooting yourself in the foot trying to insist on vtol, vtol is dogshit.
If the same pedestrians that are crashing cars every day are piloting these things, VTOL is required because they are too fucking stupid to pull off a runway landing.

Assuming some ideal like self-flying cars, maybe.

I think more realistic concerns are accidents and domestic terrorism (wait, all terrorism is brown people, my bad).

>>8142911
super short take off and landing airplanes are basically the aeronautical equivalent of motorcycles.

You want something that can carry 3 passengers, driver, and some luggage? You need more space.

Can somebody help me out a simple but unrelated problem? There's no stupid questions thread

>>8142914
VTOL is limited by basic physics
You can't change physics

>>8142916
Nobody is piloting anything, as Musk said flying cars will only work if they are fully automatic
>>8142919
Or a more powerful engine
>>8142921
Fuck off

>>8142931
>Fuck off
You first.

>>8142921
That was a pretty dumb question.
The answer is no.
>>8135617

>>8142923
>"waaah we can't go to the moon, we're limited by basic physics!"
The military made the V-22 work when all other VTOLs had failed. It was hard and expensive but they got it done because they weren't limp wristed faggots.

You can't dismiss a technology without trying. mini-VTOL has never really been done seriously, just some military tests of standing on a giant fan and Moller's foolishness.

>>8142931
>>8142939
I think you might wanna hear it first.

>>8142942
Helicopters are the BEST you can do for VTOL, and it only gets worse from there

The osprey is an example of how any piece of shit can be made to work if you throw enough billions at it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Boeing_V-22_Osprey#Specifications_.28MV-22B.29
Look at its lift.
33,000 lbs empty
add 15,000 lbs of fuel
and its only capable of 5,000 lbs payload in a vertical lift at sea level.
Give it a full sized runway, and it can take off with 13,000+ lbs

Thats physics, you can't change that.
It is normal practice to use forward lift to take off with larger payloads in the military.

So whats the point of VTOL? A false belief that its easier to automate?

>>8142952
Osprey is basically a fancy STOL cargo plane.

>>8142522
This looks wide, how will this work on a road ?

>>8142894
Flying cars could happen pretty soon, considering all vehicles are going to be driven by AI in no more than 10-20 years

The question is if they have any advantage over regular means of transportation, and I think they don't.

File: Mosquito XEL Helicopter flying.webm (3MB, 364x276px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 364x276px

>>8142522
>flying car

Oh you mean a helicopter?

>>8142901
Pretty awesome.

File: STOL - Short Runway.webm (3MB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 480x360px

>>8143555
>>8142901

>>8143504
Of course. Did you ever think that car lobby allow you to fly?

File: MUH FLYING CAR.jpg (211KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 1600x1067px

>>8142522
>A: Here it is!
>B: Oh this looks fucking cool!
>A: Yeah just finished designed it! Everything is sleek and low weight!
>B: Yeah, I see that! What is it powered by?
>A: Those are electric motors.
>B: Awesome, like 90% efficient or more right?
>A: Fucking A! LOL It will fly for hours too!
>B: So, where are the batteries stored?
>A: Ah......uh........shit......
>B: You forgot to design a place for the batteries?
>A: .......
>B: How many batteries does it take?
>A: .................
>B: ....Okay, with batteries, how long is the flight time?
>A: ....um 15-20 mins.
>B: Ok...then what happens does it glide down when the power cuts out?
>A: .........
>B: Frank, I know you have 2 hours a day, to work on your own projects here at Google, but the offices on floor 7 still need cleaned since yesterday.

>>8142793
This is something that has always puzzled me. Why is it that a helicopter can easily attain lift while it is rare for a jetfighter to produce a ration of thrust/weight much more than 1?

File: Stanford Autonomous Helicopter.webm (3MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x360px

>>8143504
http://www.cnet.com/news/a-i-controlled-helicopter-seriously-need-i-say-more/

It really depends on what you want to do with them, but they will never completely take over manual driving/piloting simply because people want to do those things for themselves.

>>8143570
That is "Lift Efficiency/Disk loading."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disk_loading

I tried that page on my T1 T2 and T3 lines, and it crashes on all of them.
Bloomberg is now officially trash.
It drives me nuts how shitty websites are now; with shitty java/flash.
Just stuck with HTML5 or fuck off already.

>>8143579
It is crashing your browser. There's some shitty code on the page that hangs Firefox for me. After a few moments it returns to normal. I think it is the overlay advertisement for their site or whatever that thing is that pops up. Well, it only freezes when that pops up at least.

Back in the day when people hand coded websites this shit happened less. Now any monkey with PC access can use shitty website builder programs with shitty layouts, bells, and whistles.

>>8143577
thx

>>8142609
You know, that helicopters can glide in a sort of way, at least land with no engine. Though this thing looks like it has no control over it's propeles, except for speed control

>>8143592
helicopters can autorotate
quad copters or tilt rotors cannot

>>8143572
We will get to a point where human driving is illegal everywhere except in controlled environments, for recreational purposes.

>>8143624
Not ever gonna happen.

>>8142522
nice NURBs bb

File: Autogyro_MT-03_(D-MTBI)_06.jpg (225KB, 1173x870px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 1173x870px

Why has everyone just completely forgotten about the autogyro?

File: autorotation.jpg (27KB, 460x530px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 460x530px

>>8143640
To clarify, thrust comes from the propeller at the back while the rotor at the top is not powered at all, but rather works like a sort of wing using the same principle as autorotation in helicopters.

>>8143640
Because it's not autonomous and not even VTOL

>>8142952
They must have had a reason to prefer it over a helicopter. I think it's faster.

>>8143545
>(you)

>>8143627
I agree. I also happen to not see past my nose.

>>8143675
They can be made autonomous just like everything, obviously.
They can do vtol, sort of
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ISIlgMcb-U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWjBTROfLMQ
But it requires at least some drive on the top rotor I think. Though I don't think vtol is at all essential for a flying car.

>>8143746
Of course but it would be harder to automate and hence too costly to sell to the plebs.

>>8143763
Why would it be harder to automate? Seems significantly easier than a quad rotor platform or something like that, actually.

>>8143826
Swashplates are more complex than just directly varying voltage to a quad motor. You would need precise repeatable fast actuator control and if you know anything about robotics this is hard. Also you have to sync it with the rudder. With quads absolutely everything is controlled by the prop speed and nothing else.

I want to start a flying car research group. Who wants to join? It will be lots of fun, trying to stand on various giant drones, maybe a BBQ after

>>8143868
How much are you paying?

>>8143878
It's voluntary but if an actual business grows out of it you can be a salaried employee. Think Steve Jobs' garage circa 1979. The local kids who didn't take part are probably kicking themselves now. Don't be that kid.

>>8143878
For the BBQ bring your own meat and beer

>>8143896
You can just use the meat from one of the unlucky fellows to fall into a giant quadcopter's rotor blades.

>>8143741
Indeed, you're an idiot if you think manual driving will be made illegal. you are an idiot if you think humanity will ever reach the point of automated vehicles everywhere to the point where such a law would be considered. you're an idiot if you think humanity will ever last that long in the first place.

>>8143763
>>8143859
>Of course but it would be harder to automate

fucking moron

>>8143951
?
You expect global nuclear war within 10 years?

I expect insurance companies to offer big discounts for auto-driving or at least built in crash-prevention systems
Followed by governments mandating it in every car
Followed by the government mandating cars be automatically driven on all government roads

>>8143976
You a tinfoil hatter? Civilization doesn't need nuclear war to be fucked over and decline, which has been happening slowly for the past 15-20 years. I guess you'd not know that since you're probably underage.

>>8143569
Why label them A and B if you are going to give one a name?

>>8144069
civilization ain't going to magically disappear even if whites die off
asians will continue, and they will invent autocars

>>8144107
Except their countries are all overpopulated and are going to implode, creating a super-massive cultural black hole.

>>8142522
how about you drop the tripcode retarded idiot

eat shit tripfag

>>8144107
That isn't what was said. Decline =/= disappear.

>>8143905
>What is chicken wire?

>>8144619
really fucking heavy.
Have you never worked a day in your life?

>>8144621
>What is carbon fibre chicken wire?

>>8144654
really expensive
Why would you waste carbon fiber on chickens?

>>8144676
Patricians will spend the money

>>8143593
quadcopters have redundancy

>>8146085
So now on top of using a completely shit form of lift, which is small electric powered rotors, you are keeping a 25%+ margin at all times.

File: Helicopter.webm (2MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 640x360px

>>8146085
For what purpose?

>>8146085
except when the battery dies

>>8142522

and? They've already sold off boston dynamics and probably have already given up on making a self driving car

Google is a software company, not a manufacturer. They aren't going to be taking Cessna, Bell or Piper on because there is no room to do so.

>>8146362
Not dying.

>>8147056
But it doesn't work that way.