[belgianguy]

I wouldn't call this a flying car, I would call this a quadcopter with wheels.

While the prospect of having less traffic jams is desirable, the odds of being T-boned from above or below by a distracted pilot become greater than zero.

I think we'll need Type 5-and-then-some AI pilots before any of this becomes a reality in day to day commutes.

[erklik]

> I think we'll need Type 5-and-then-some AI pilots before any of this becomes a reality in day to day commutes.

Wouldn't AI in flight become much easier to create compared to driving AI on the ground? I mean don't planes already have somewhat of an autopilot.

I have no experience or knowledge on the matter, but common sense seems to indicate that air-flight has considerably less environmental variables and could be significantly easier in most cases.

[bobthepanda]

> air-flight has considerably less environmental variables

Does it? Instead of routing in two dimensions you now need to do it in three. You then also need to take into account other actors who are also routing in three dimensions. There are no road delineators in the sky.

There's also the rather obvious safety concern that in the event of a malfunction, an accelerating, out of control thousands-of-pounds mass accelerating forwards becomes an accelerating, out of control thousands-of-pounds mass accelerating forwards and coming down due to gravity.

[enneff]

Routing is much easier when you can basically go from point A to B directly. Coordination would be required to prevent collisions with other vehicles, but evasion in 3D just means changing to an uncontended altitude. I think the extra dimension actually makes it easier.

[benbristow]

I think you're right.

Planes have had autopilot systems for a while now where they basically fly themselves.

The big tech firms have been struggling to make a fully autonomous no-human-needed driving car for a while now. So many variables to deal with. Watch Tesla videos on YouTube and you'll see them still struggling on certain types/conditions of roads etc.

[thombat]

Large planes fly themselves on planned routes which avoid incursions by other planes by design: the function of air traffic control is to assign the routes such that incursions don't occur. In the event that the onboard collision avoidance system projects that another aircraft will come too close the warns the pilot with a recommended action. There is also a ground proximity warning system which issues warnings about collision with ground/mapped obstacles but again leaves it to the pilot to take the necessary action.

ATC relies upon surveillance radar that won't provide adequate coverage at low elevations (too many obstructions). ATC is also badly overstretched in busy airspaces coping with existing traffic. Adding a large number of new low-altitude aircraft will require new navigation technology (e.g. coordinating a swarm of vehicles in close proximity, relaying warnings about dangerous wind conditions or uncontrolled vehicles, etc)

Conditions in the air can be more treacherous than on a road: although there are more degrees of freedom the supporting air is also more variable than a road: wind shear and clear air turbulence can be perilous even for large aircraft, icing can quickly cripple aerodynamics, and in the event of failure safely halting can be problematic.

[bobthepanda]

Planes follow flight plans which must be pre-filed before the flight. That doesn't scale for personal travel.

[erklik]

> Does it? Instead of routing in two dimensions you now need to do it in three. You then also need to take into account other actors who are also routing in three dimensions. There are no road delineators in the sky.

Well, the 3rd dimension is likely to remain fairly static for most of the trip. I don't see personal flying cars going up and down repeatedly for no reason unless there is an obstacle in the front and once high enough, there shouldn't be many of those.

[nradov]

Flying from point A to point B while avoiding collisions is relatively straightforward. The really hard part is dealing with in-flight emergencies like mechanical failures or sudden weather changes. It's impossible to predict and program for every failure mode which could happen in the real world. A human ATP rated pilot has enough experience to solve problems in real time but current AI technology is incapable of that.

[tsimionescu]

Air conditions are significantly more complex than road conditions, I would guess - wind direction, temperature differentials, air density may all vary and I imagine they could affect flight characteristics.

It's true that you won't encounter pedestrians, and congestion will be much less of a problem initially, but birds are still a major concern.

[excalibur]

> I wouldn't call this a flying car, I would call this a quadcopter with wheels.

It looks to me like a quadcopter with a secret weapon. Like Christian Bale's Batmobile could spit out a crazy motorcycle, this looks like it would spit out a bicycle with a stupid trailer.

On second thought, maybe it's more like an RC tricycle with a detachable quadcopter.