Flying cars? really?

Be kind of hard to get one without a pilot's license.

Look ugly and not too sturdy. But the general concept is so fucking awesome: "honey, I'm running up late to get to the runway". *arrives at the runway*

Wings out and up you go. You land and go right away to the highway.

This. A "flying car" is already "an aircraft". And people can get aircraft now. It's just out of most peoples' means. In large part because it's more expensive than driving, and also because you need to get a freaking pilot's license.

Flying cars are essentially just some cool sort of airplane. Yes, you need a pilot's license for that shit. Also, you generally need to have the means and desire to spend a shitload more time on maintenance and repair. I don't know why flying cars are so ideal to other people, but I know why the idea is attractive to me. Wouldn't it be great if whenever I was stuck in traffic, I could just zip into the air and soar over all the jackasses on the road? Well, hey...the time I avoid spending in traffic is just going to go into a shitload of maintenance. As in, doing a bunch of scheduled inspections and going over a long pre-flight checklist before I even get to start "driving".

And that's also neglecting that "air traffic" is actually a thing. Yeah...being able to fly might seem cool, but not when "consumer-grade flying cars" are a real thing, and everyone else has the same idea as you. Now you're STILL stuck in traffic. Only you're in the sky instead of on the ground. Which means that getting stuck in traffick is now actually worse, since overcoming gravity like that actually costs lot more than just sitting still on the ground. Hooray for spending an assload of money just on fuel.

Bottom line...flying cars might be great. If there's only ONE flying car, and the guy who owns that flying car is so amazingly rich that he simply don't give a shit. But approximately NONE of the people asking for flying cars are in that position. This means that if you get a flying car, so do a shitload of other people. And the fact that a shtload of other people get them too just ruins the whole thing and makes it exactly like driving. Only worse. Or like just travelling via airplane (which people actually do now). Only worse. Flying cars are one of the best-looking worst ideas ever. Everyone wants one, but I guarantee that they'd hate that shit more than regular cars if flying cars ever happened. This is the kind of stuff that looks really cool in sci-fi movies but would suck in all ways in actual reality. It's like a car, but worse. And it's like an airplane, but worse. The worst of both worlds, yes, give me that!

You're forgetting a lot of things

1. flying doesn't happen on one level like driving does, there's kilometres/miles of vertical space. Computers, radar, sensors, gps and traffic systems could easily figure out at what altitude you need to fly to avoid accidents,

2 . You're also not bound to roads, the whole sky is a road. Again gps, radar computers, sensors and traffic systems could easily figure out how to avoid accidents.

3.. There are alternative means of fuel, the only problem is , the people in power want to keep using oil, since it makes them money

4. Not everyone likes flying, myself included

5. Even with a ton of people flying , we still have computers to keep everything in order. The moment we fill up airspace so much that computer, gps, radar, sensors and traffic systems can't guide us to avoid accidents we will have other problems than too much flying cars in the sky and that will be overpopulation. The sky holds a lot more space than the ground btw.

6. Thank you for your pseudo-intellectual reply.

1) If I get stuck in traffic now, at least I can pull over on the side of the road, step out of my car, or just pull into a diner and read a book until traffic dies down. How the hell am I supposed to do that when I'm stuck in a traffic jam "kilometres/miles" above the ground?

2) Maybe, but let's not forget that that's a hard sell. There are self-driving car prototypes being driven right now, and they apparently have a good safety record. Still, ask yourself how many car drivers would be willing to hand over their lives to the will of a computer, when it comes to driving. Not saying that this particular aspect won't happen eventually (I think the safety record guarantees it's gonna be a reality at some point), but again...that's a hard sell. This is the one aspect that MAYBE makes consumer grade "flying cars" a reality. But again...this is also the as0pect that guarantees that if flying cars become real, that they're gonna ruin the appeal of the idea. Even if we can program the cars with sufficient software that enables them to avoid such accidents, they WILL bind themselves to airborne "roads" simply because that enables the ai to account for the different variables. Ever seen The Fifth Element? Remember the flying cars in that? Yep, just lots of roads extending up into the sky.

3) Doesn't matter what the fuel source is. Flying cars are gonna be more expensive than regular cars regardless of the fuel source, because overcoming gravity requires an energy expenditure.

4) So why do you want flying cars?

5) See point #2.

6) My pleasure.

we already have flying cars and rich people already used them. They are called helicopters.

Seems like a pointless gimmick. You'll never be allowed to land/take off in normal roads and nobody is going to be building landing strips besides roads every 50km's...

Not to mention the sheer volume of traffic would make managing it all a nightmare.

I guess at least the helicopter cars can land and take off vertically so that would solve some of the problems, but really...I don't think it's a good idea.

I never got the fascination with flying cars, well they're cool, but it's not the way to go. I want Startrek's teleporter, that would save a lot of valuable time.

1) Traffic jams in the sky won't happen, for reasons prevously mentioned, the moment we would have traffic jams in the sky, we would have much bigger problems than that, overpopulation that is

2) Navigational systems don't mean 'self-driven'

3) yes of course, another reason why the sky won't be filled up with flying cars, since the roads will be cheaper.

4) I never said I wanted them, nor was against them, I did not vent my opinion on this

5) See point 2

6) I was being sarcastic, still, that was a nice anwer, it made me laugh

A gyrocopter will do fine for me. No license required (at least here in the US).

Photo from tripadvisor.com

@jun_aka_pekto said:

A gyrocopter will do fine for me. No license required (at least here in the US).

Photo from tripadvisor.com

That's technically true if the gyrocopter is considered an "ultralight" but that basically also means it's a "recreational" flight vehicle and as such you aren't really going to be able to use that for transportation. As soon as you make it even remotely practical (add a second seat, give it a fuel tank that can hold more than five gallons, give it an engine that can go faster than 55 knots (or around 63mph)) then it's no longer an ultralight and you need a sports pilot license and the vehicle itself has to be certified by the FAA as airworthy.

-Byshop

@jun_aka_pekto said:

A gyrocopter will do fine for me. No license required (at least here in the US).

Photo from tripadvisor.com

well when looking at the prices of gyrocopters I wonder why you're worried about licences lol

They're not bad. ~$100k is about right for a tiny flying machine. They're about the price of a new Class A motorhome and there's so many of those here.

I've ridden and piloted (not solo) a few ultralights back in my hometown in Nevada. I would love to have a gyrocopter.

I don't know about this. Can you Imagine, Car Insurance skyrocket for this and not to mention, what happens when flying cars get into a collision? More Money is all these Car Insurance is gonna ask from you.

Ah yes, I can see it now. You can just imagine drunk drivers zipping through the air, crashing into the top floors of homes or buildings.