Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You don't have flying cars because if you think traffic jams and collisions are bad in 2D wait until you have it in 3D.


That's just one logistical problem (of many). The real reason we don't have flying cars is because we don't want them bad enough. If we spent enough capital, we could solve all the logistical and technical challenges and have flying cars. But the cost and effort it would take is so significant that nobody has yet had a good enough reason to do it.

Planes are good enough for going a long distance fast, and cars/trucks/trains are good enough for going a long distance slow. We could make a flying car, but for what? For individual people to go a moderate-distance fast? To go a short distance really fast? Cars and planes are good enough for our needs today without the huge investment in development of a new tech.

This is exactly the same reason internal combustion engines have ruled the roads for 100 years. Electric cars were preferred over ICE 100 years ago, but gasoline enabled us to go further for cheaper, so we accepted all the downsides, and industry made it convenient. It's only because we're suddenly afraid of our climate killing us that we're switching back to electric.


I think that’s a solvable problem. The actual physical limitation is sound: who wants a helicopter taking off right next to them in the evening?

Just imagine the noise pollution.


Nobody wants leaf blowers either, but hiring a guy with a leaf blower is cheaper than 3 guys with rakes, so here we are.


Lots of neighborhoods are banning them, ours did.


I think California banned the loud ones entirely, but people haven't caught up yet.


The actual "physical limitation" is that the typical average human simply cannot be trusted with a flying car. They can barely be trusted with regular ordinary run-of-the-mill cars.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: