Uber is blowing through cash just trying to run an taxi service without the economies of scale that a normal one enjoys. They'll certainly never have enough money or talent to be a real player in self driving cars. But now we're supposed to think they're going to make drones? This looks like a thinly-veiled effort to continue to attract investor money for the failed taxi biz.
You see the effects of the monoculture here. If their hiring process wasn't a poster child for age discrimination they might have somebody who remembers the 1970s. (eg. people who think that way won't learn it from history either because "this time is different" every time)
V(S)TOL is right up there with the SST (Supersonic Transport) and the LMFBR (Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor) failure stories of technology in the 1970s.
Heck, in the 1970s you could take a helicopter from the roof of the world trade center to JFK airport. It was fast and fun (if loud) but also the helicopters tended to crash and the passengers die.
After heavy investment, people discovered a large number of reasons why VTOL is not competitive for passenger use. Maybe they have some answer to these problems (eg. answers to the LFMBR problems and SST problems have been talked about) but cool 3d renders don't cut it.
Fortunately for them most people don't seem to remember past the headlines a week ago, so they might get away with.
VTOL has been marginally successful in military applications, although the Harrier 2 is the only unequivocally successful VTOL aircraft. The USMC says it likes the V-22 Osprey but the USMC also doesn't like to talk about failure in public. Development programs and operations for military VTOLs have resulted in accidents that have resulted in dozens of families getting a sad call from a commanding officer.
2 comments
[ 4.6 ms ] story [ 19.0 ms ] threadV(S)TOL is right up there with the SST (Supersonic Transport) and the LMFBR (Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor) failure stories of technology in the 1970s.
Heck, in the 1970s you could take a helicopter from the roof of the world trade center to JFK airport. It was fast and fun (if loud) but also the helicopters tended to crash and the passengers die.
After heavy investment, people discovered a large number of reasons why VTOL is not competitive for passenger use. Maybe they have some answer to these problems (eg. answers to the LFMBR problems and SST problems have been talked about) but cool 3d renders don't cut it.
Fortunately for them most people don't seem to remember past the headlines a week ago, so they might get away with.
VTOL has been marginally successful in military applications, although the Harrier 2 is the only unequivocally successful VTOL aircraft. The USMC says it likes the V-22 Osprey but the USMC also doesn't like to talk about failure in public. Development programs and operations for military VTOLs have resulted in accidents that have resulted in dozens of families getting a sad call from a commanding officer.