[khgvljhkb]

Seems pretty inefficient to fly things, because the energy needed to keep it floating in air. Although history tells us never to say never about technology, it seems like having small autonomous robots on wheels. They could travel on the sidewalks in cities, and also go the fastest way straight thru forest (for the many who live outside of cities).

[mod]

Flying has got to be more efficient than traveling through a forest.

As a person who spends a lot of time in the forest, there's a ton of impassable obstacles. Cliff faces, streams, briar patches, downed logs, etc.

The robot on the ground would spend more energy in the forest than the robot in the sky.

I think being in the sky also helps keep them from being a target for looting.

[toxican]

>I think being in the sky also helps keep them from being a target for looting.

But then a target for shooting :)

[BinaryIdiot]

While I agree with you that wheels would be more efficient energy wise the problem there is obstacle avoidance (especially if it travels down a long path that is suddenly blocked and it has to return) (thus maybe it's not as energy efficient except for very direct and easy routes) and thievery. Flying solves both of those issues but is expensive energy wise.

I think we'll see this little by little in testing and, maybe in 5-10 years, one of this laboratory "break throughs" in batteries will materialize and drones will be able to fly very far away and this will become cost effective.

[oldfatslow]

I think flying over a forest would be way easier on a robot than weaving it's way through underbrush. Although, a slithering robot would be pretty awesome!

[nsgi]

You could say the same thing about aeroplanes.