Uber To Take Over GA From 2020
Thread Starter
Uber To Take Over GA From 2020
Ok I'll bite.
Firstly, here is the white paper: https://www.uber.com/elevate.pdf
Your headline is misleading. Apart from transporting Bronwyn Bishop 5 miles across town, this concept is not displacing GA. In fact the Uber concept will rely on pilots (hooray!) which is probably a mistake (wait, what?). These kinds of autonomous transport in the future will be automated. Why would you waste precious weight transporting a human when that could be better spent on more batteries for longer range, or another human passenger.
Secondly, Uber are a walking dead company. They won't be around in 2020 (caveat: unless they somehow convince some more idiot investors to give them more money). Their employees are leaving in droves, they are plagued by scandals and court cases, their CEO is an asshole etc etc. Countries are clamping down on the lack of employee benefits they (don't) pay their drivers. See Italy most recently. And that is not to mention their main taxi business *burns* capital. From what I read, 1/3 of your fare has been discounted by investors. Thanks Dotcom bubble v2.0 !!
Anyway back to driverless plane: neat concept and it will happen, but won't be displacing GA for another decade at least. Battery energy density & charging times needs some breakthroughs for longer distance transportation.
What we will see in the interim is more hybrid solutions. I visited Aero-Expo this year in Europe where the theme was electric GA. Some cool developments taking place. Bigger than I realised. But still years off.
For anybody interested in what the next 10 years of technology will bring in the car space, which has relevance to aircraft, take a look at Tony Seba's video: https://youtu.be/Kxryv2XrnqM
It's very well researched and presented. Highly recommended.
Firstly, here is the white paper: https://www.uber.com/elevate.pdf
Your headline is misleading. Apart from transporting Bronwyn Bishop 5 miles across town, this concept is not displacing GA. In fact the Uber concept will rely on pilots (hooray!) which is probably a mistake (wait, what?). These kinds of autonomous transport in the future will be automated. Why would you waste precious weight transporting a human when that could be better spent on more batteries for longer range, or another human passenger.
Secondly, Uber are a walking dead company. They won't be around in 2020 (caveat: unless they somehow convince some more idiot investors to give them more money). Their employees are leaving in droves, they are plagued by scandals and court cases, their CEO is an asshole etc etc. Countries are clamping down on the lack of employee benefits they (don't) pay their drivers. See Italy most recently. And that is not to mention their main taxi business *burns* capital. From what I read, 1/3 of your fare has been discounted by investors. Thanks Dotcom bubble v2.0 !!
Anyway back to driverless plane: neat concept and it will happen, but won't be displacing GA for another decade at least. Battery energy density & charging times needs some breakthroughs for longer distance transportation.
What we will see in the interim is more hybrid solutions. I visited Aero-Expo this year in Europe where the theme was electric GA. Some cool developments taking place. Bigger than I realised. But still years off.
For anybody interested in what the next 10 years of technology will bring in the car space, which has relevance to aircraft, take a look at Tony Seba's video: https://youtu.be/Kxryv2XrnqM
It's very well researched and presented. Highly recommended.
Just another attention seeking news headline. Not going to happen in that time period if at all. End. Of. Story.
I love all these tech nerds who think that aviation regulators are just going to roll over and waiver every regulation that ever existed because they're 'special'.
Contingency procedures with a EFATO in an urban environment alone would be a massive hurdle to jump over, and that is assuming you already have a type certificate and an AOC.
I love all these tech nerds who think that aviation regulators are just going to roll over and waiver every regulation that ever existed because they're 'special'.
Contingency procedures with a EFATO in an urban environment alone would be a massive hurdle to jump over, and that is assuming you already have a type certificate and an AOC.
Actually multi rotor electrics can handle engine failures quite easy. This is not a 1950's era lycoming which is what the regulations are designed around.
And you are right - this will never happen first in highly regulated countries. Which is why they are doing it in the UAE and elsewhere first.
Once this kind of concept has a million hours of real life operational data and a public screaming out for it, the regulators will have no choice: the politicians will tell them to make it happen.
The article is deliberately sensational, yes. But I think the author also doesn't realise they may actually be covering something big developing over the next 10+ years, even though it's probably not going to be Uber's concept that gets there.
And you are right - this will never happen first in highly regulated countries. Which is why they are doing it in the UAE and elsewhere first.
Once this kind of concept has a million hours of real life operational data and a public screaming out for it, the regulators will have no choice: the politicians will tell them to make it happen.
The article is deliberately sensational, yes. But I think the author also doesn't realise they may actually be covering something big developing over the next 10+ years, even though it's probably not going to be Uber's concept that gets there.
If the CAA won't allow a chopper with one engine and 1 or 2 pilots to fly in a particular area, for whatever reason, they sure as heck won't let a driverless electric machine do it either.
Actually multi rotor electrics can handle engine failures quite easy. This is not a 1950's era lycoming which is what the regulations are designed around.
The issue here will not be CASA. Look at the Australian Design Rules for motor vehicles. First each state does it differently, the crash requirements will increase weight beyond "beam me up Scotty" limits and the fight over licensing will go forever.
...Which is why this thing will never happen in Australia first.
In 2 years, early adopters will be in driverless cars. By 5 years, all new cars will be electric, driverless with the ability to be put to work generating the owner money. Cars will switch from ownership to car-as-a-service. The transition will be households with 1 car instead of two, and primary commuting done driverless.
By 10 years, about when we're landing people on mars (and doing return journeys every 2 years when Earth & Mars line up), countries will mandate zero cars be internal combustion engine. 100% of new cars sold, with perhaps some exceptions for vintage models, will be electric driverless.
Now back to our drone thing: how hard do you think it will be for regulators and rule makers to see an autonomous drone concept as safe in 5-10 years. Incredibly easy. Considering aviation automation is much easier than cars. And the same regulators will probably be catching a ride to work where their car drives them.
Don't compare an R22 with this concept. Autonomous drones will have 4 to 12 electric motors. Incredibly simple and fault tolerant. Ballistic parachute most likely.
But it won't be Uber that does it!
In 2 years, early adopters will be in driverless cars. By 5 years, all new cars will be electric, driverless with the ability to be put to work generating the owner money. Cars will switch from ownership to car-as-a-service. The transition will be households with 1 car instead of two, and primary commuting done driverless.
By 10 years, about when we're landing people on mars (and doing return journeys every 2 years when Earth & Mars line up), countries will mandate zero cars be internal combustion engine. 100% of new cars sold, with perhaps some exceptions for vintage models, will be electric driverless.
Now back to our drone thing: how hard do you think it will be for regulators and rule makers to see an autonomous drone concept as safe in 5-10 years. Incredibly easy. Considering aviation automation is much easier than cars. And the same regulators will probably be catching a ride to work where their car drives them.
Don't compare an R22 with this concept. Autonomous drones will have 4 to 12 electric motors. Incredibly simple and fault tolerant. Ballistic parachute most likely.
But it won't be Uber that does it!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 72
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's called "disruptive technology" for a reason. Comments here remind me of Kodak's reaction to digital photography. CASA won't have much say in what happens. CASA currently caters for a relatively small part of the populace but demand will force CASA's hand. Uber has already disrupted the surface taxi industry and there's no reason it won't succeed here. Again, it was public demand.
This won't be a door to door service but hub to hub where there will be surface transport? A surface taxi in peak times from Melbourne airport to Dandenong can take two to three hours. An air taxi, fifteen to twenty minutes.
This won't be a door to door service but hub to hub where there will be surface transport? A surface taxi in peak times from Melbourne airport to Dandenong can take two to three hours. An air taxi, fifteen to twenty minutes.
Don't compare an R22 with this concept. Autonomous drones will have 4 to 12 electric motors. Incredibly simple and fault tolerant. Ballistic parachute most likely.
The whole 'disruption' mantra is just an excuse to flaunt the rules. If one of these electric things got airborne in your urban heliport and had a EFATO and went straight down it would be a huge public safety issue.
By 5 years, all new cars will be electric,
The NIMBYs will stop it, if Labor doesn't. Noise and "perceived noise" is the killer - people see something in the sky, assume it is noisy, and get irritated by it, the complaint ends up on the Minister's table, and with the next election only 6 months away, he will stop the lot.
If Sydney can't get one CBD heliport, it certainly won't get a bunch of suburban hubs ("Huburban"?)
If Sydney can't get one CBD heliport, it certainly won't get a bunch of suburban hubs ("Huburban"?)
Just explain to me again how these Uber machines will be powered?
Electric is all fine and dandy. How much do the batteries weigh? How much energy needed to lift just the batteries?
How long do the batteries provide power for? How long to recharge them?
How much noise will the props/fans make?
Electric is all fine and dandy. How much do the batteries weigh? How much energy needed to lift just the batteries?
How long do the batteries provide power for? How long to recharge them?
How much noise will the props/fans make?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 72
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just explain to me again how these horseless carriages will be powered.
Petrol is all fine and dandy. How big is the tank? How many petrol stations will there be?
How far on a tank?
The noise will scare the horses.
Aerial taxis are coming.
All the problems and objections will be overcome. The only drawback is that they will take some of the magic from flying.
Petrol is all fine and dandy. How big is the tank? How many petrol stations will there be?
How far on a tank?
The noise will scare the horses.
Aerial taxis are coming.
All the problems and objections will be overcome. The only drawback is that they will take some of the magic from flying.
Fujii
You're missing my point.
The big fly in the ointment is the energy density of what ever is used as a power source. Petrol (gasoline) has 53 times the watt/hour capacity of a lithium ion battery. In other words for every kilo of petrol you need 53 kilograms of lithium ion battery. With current technology an electric powered aircraft doesn't make sense.
So far as the noise goes, I'm not thinking of the horses. Noise pollution is becoming a bigger and bigger issue, I don't see the noise these things will make as being accepted by the general population.
You're missing my point.
The big fly in the ointment is the energy density of what ever is used as a power source. Petrol (gasoline) has 53 times the watt/hour capacity of a lithium ion battery. In other words for every kilo of petrol you need 53 kilograms of lithium ion battery. With current technology an electric powered aircraft doesn't make sense.
So far as the noise goes, I'm not thinking of the horses. Noise pollution is becoming a bigger and bigger issue, I don't see the noise these things will make as being accepted by the general population.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 72
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
25
Apr
2017
Uber partners with Pipistrel Aircraft to manufacture electric VTOLs
(za tekst v slovenskem jeziku kliknite tukaj)Uber partners with Pipistrel Aircraft to manufacture electric VTOLsDallas, 25 April 2017It is our pleasure and honor to inform you that Uber and Pipistrel announced today in Dallas (USA) at Uber Elevate Summit
Pipistrel is already a world leader in electrically powered aircraft. Battery technology is rapidly advancing.
Apr
2017
Uber partners with Pipistrel Aircraft to manufacture electric VTOLs
(za tekst v slovenskem jeziku kliknite tukaj)Uber partners with Pipistrel Aircraft to manufacture electric VTOLsDallas, 25 April 2017It is our pleasure and honor to inform you that Uber and Pipistrel announced today in Dallas (USA) at Uber Elevate Summit
Pipistrel is already a world leader in electrically powered aircraft. Battery technology is rapidly advancing.
I struggle with the concept but as an adherent of horseless carriages I offer you this:
Silicon Valley discovers Aviation: But for how long?
Silicon Valley discovers Aviation: But for how long?
Last edited by Horatio Leafblower; 30th Apr 2017 at 10:58. Reason: link
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 72
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts