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

That is precisely the problem: believing that one can succeed in this space. Flying personal transport is not economical. On a side note, it doesn't matter how brilliant an engineer is if you set impractical goals to him. Neither good engineers not deep pocketed backers could make Theranos real.


And why are you so certain that flying personal transport is not economical?

Certainly the history of the automobile should show that such statements can look ridiculous in hindsight.


He's certain because of energy budgets, weight constraints, safety reasons and more. The history of the automobile vs aircraft shows he's right.

To move something in the air inherently uses more energy than any sort of ground transport. To make the aircraft more efficient, you have cut weight, which means more exotic (i.e. expensive) materials. The powerplant has to have a higher power:weight ratio (again more expensive). It's more dangerous to be flying, so you need additional safety equipment that ground vehicles don't need. Etc, etc.

And if any aviation technologies manages to gain price/performance better than the stuff used for ground transport... it will be adopted by ground transport. Which still leaves air transport more expensive for the reasons listed above and many others. Hell, in WW2, they stuck an aircraft engine into the most common US tank (sherman). Interestingly, sherman tank crews didn't have to worry about falling out of the sky and dying if their engine failed (though they had lots of other worries, of course).

Long story short: there is nothing magical about electric motors turning propellers. And battery energy density is utterly horrible vs gasoline/kerosene. Air transport will ALWAYS be more expensive than ground transport. Perhaps someday it will be cheap enough to be common. But personally, I doubt that such a day is anytime soon.

Last aside... You can buy a small used two or four seater plane NOW for < $100k. Get a pilots license and you can fly around to your heart's content. General passenger aviation today is not reserved for the ultra rich.


1. You missed the point of the analogy

2. This entirely depends on the speed. For high speeds an airplane can be more efficient than ground based transportation. See von Karman efficiency, eg : https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Omer-Kinaci/publication...

3. Exotic materials like aluminum and carbon fiber? The BMW i3 adopted the latter for example

4. A better way to look at it isn’t whether air transport will ever be cheaper, but whether air transport can be cheap enough to be worth it due to the unique advantages it offers. Eg flying in a straight line, flying faster, no traffic, relatively easy autonomy compared to ground, etc


>To move something in the air inherently uses more energy than any sort of ground transport

… if the object is heavy. Bats hit 99.5 mph in level flight: https://www.audubon.org/news/the-common-swift-no-longer-fast...




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

Search: