From: mikkelhaaheim@gmail.com   
      
   I am starting this thread in response to the rather side-bar discussion from   
   the thread for the arbitrarily long nanotube article. In essence, Doc think   
   that the flying car concept is perpetually impractical hogwash, and Jim   
   disagree's.   
   I have three principle reasons for beginning this new thread... beside's the   
   fact that I was incommunicado throughought the bulk of the discussion while it   
   was taking place.   
   1) I find the prospectof flying cars to be inherently interesting, and think   
   that the discussion desrves it's own theatre. Regardless of Doc's opinions   
   regarding the concept itself, I don't think he would disagree too much   
   (subconsciously, at least) with    
   this evaluation, given his investment in trying to persuade others that the   
   concept is not worth investigating.   
   2) The topic reall has very little to do with arbitrarily long nanotubes, and   
   less to do with the subject of space elevators... which started the whole   
   argument in the first place.   
   3)I wanted to take a step back to summarise some of the main points, clean up   
   the argument, and add my own 3 cents worth (inflation and mark-downs).   
      
      
   ..........   
      
   Doc (paraphrasing, of course):   
   Flying cars are a stupid idea because no one in their right mind would be   
   interested in one, it is a bad idea that will never have a market (and is   
   therefor no more than sci-fi mythology), and it is inherently impractical. Why   
   would you subject a plane    
   to the wear & tear of a car, and to the resulting unreliability? Why would you   
   need to have a flying car when you will need to drive it to the airport   
   anyway? Why would people want a flying car if they need pilot's licenses just   
   to drive it? Why would    
   people allow flying cars when it increases the risk of cars falling into their   
   homes? There is no such thing as a flying car in the real world, and there   
   never will be.   
      
   Jim:   
   Doc is a short sighted, narrow minded idiot. Flying cars are real, and have   
   been since the 1930s... they just haven't made it to market for mass   
   consumption. There are currently a lot of impracticalities and hindrances, but   
   there is nothing that says    
   they will always remain so. People have always made similar arguments whenever   
   anything new was created. Flying cars do not exist yet because of economic   
   factors... that is all.   
      
      
   ..........   
      
   I don't always agree with Jim, but I have to lean toward siding with him on   
   this matter. OTOH, Jim is oversmplifying things a little. He isn't wrong. He   
   just doesn't go into all the detail about the economics involved... and I am   
   not certain he really    
   knows, himself.   
      
   Doc is correct in that there are a number of questions and obstacles that must   
   be addressed. However, he appears to be somewhat ignorant in the nature of   
   bureaucracy.   
   Yes, there is a risk for unreliability due to wear and tear. Flying cars will   
   have to go through environment strains that planes simply aren't built for. So   
   what? Designers and builders will take those stresses and strains into   
   account. So will the law.    
   You probably won't have the same maintenance schedules that commercial and   
   private airlines are subject to, but there will likely be mandatory insurance   
   coverage and routine maintenance certification checks (probably once a year,   
   perhaps longer for more    
   detailed inspections involving less critical components).   
   People are not going to want to have to go to the airport. So a civil   
   infrastructure to support flying car traffic will have to be built. This is   
   not unprecidented. The same thing has been true for electric cars. Guess what?   
   ... I envision something like    
   a widening of straightaway sections of freeway to include landing and take-off   
   lanes for flying cars. These lanes will be barricaded from regular traffic   
   (like many commuter traffic lanes), except for entry and exit points, to   
   prevent interference from    
   unlawful passing or lane changes. There will also be markings and lights,   
   viewable from the air, indicating lawful "holding zone" patterns for heavy   
   traffic conditions, and "traffic lights" only viewable from the approach   
   vector (similar to on-ramp    
   traffic lights) indicating when it is safe to commit to land. There will also   
   be other designated air-strips built adjacent to common city streets, with   
   much the same features. As flying car traffic increases, so will the number of   
   such accomodations.   
   With flying cars will come new license classifications, and new regulations.   
   There will be new systems of markings and lighting to mark legal traffic   
   zones. There will be new regulations for "right of way" traffic. There will be   
   regulations for    
   authorised altitude zones, etc. Your drivers' licenses will have something   
   like a class "FC" for flying car authorisation, and "CFC" for commercial   
   flying car traffic (flying taxis and courriers, etc). You will not be   
   authorised to fly planes.   
   Required insurance means that if a car falls into a home, the insurance will   
   cover all damages and injuries. Routine inspection and certification   
   requirements will help to ensure that such accidents don't happen because of   
   technical problems. A certain    
   level of inspection will be the daily responsibility of the pilot, just as   
   daily car inspection is for a driver. If there is a technical problem   
   resulting from the neglect of a piolt, it will be the responsibility of the   
   pilot, just as maintenance    
   problems for cars are considered the fault of the driver. Apart from that,   
   there is very little that protects houses from cars driving into them. The   
   likelihood of a flying car crashing into a house is no more than that of a car   
   crashing into the house    
   from the surface.   
   Jim is correct to point out that flying cars exist, even if they have not   
   (yet) achieved marketing. The fact that more companies continue to pursue the   
   venture is an indication that it is not myth. So long as people continue   
   trying, it will eventually    
   become a fact. Some factors such as automatic piloting will make it even more   
   feasible.   
      
   What Jim misses is that it is not just a matter of the economics of designing,   
   bulding, marketing, and operating the FC itself. There is also the economics   
   of building a suitable infrastructure. Furthermore, there is the economics of   
   manipulating law to    
   provide for the authorised operation of FCs. It will not be easy.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)