Originally Posted by
pattern_is_full
Bend alot: I quite agree that there can be shortsightness. But that cuts both ways. One has to be longsighted enough to see the problems and solve them ahead of time.
A) Will there be new batteries? Very probably. Will they mean compressing more and more joules into smaller and smaller packages? Yep. Three numbers to keep in mind: 7-8-7. Cellphone and laptop batteries have already started small on-board fires, and then there is UPS 6 - brought down by autoignition of a cargo pallet of 81,000 lithium batteries.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UPS_Airlines_Flight_6
B) Good idea - in principle. But - voltage-carrying taxiways? "Third rails" alongside? Overhead wires? We'll assume linear accelerators can be tuned to be less violent than carrier launches.
How much power will "beamed power" beams have to transmit to hold up x-many kilos of aircraft, and x-many kilos of passengers? At what point do they become thousands of
directed-energy weapons criss-crossing the skies?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed-energy_weapon
Good (longsighted) engineering is not just having a bright idea - it is poking all the holes in that idea yourself, and then figuring out how to plug them.
A) those pesky batteries, good thing that Avgas and Jet A1 has never caused any issues on aircraft or deaths.
B) Maglev or something new.
The thrust required for a set speed to overcome the drag is what is needed to be known, once that is sorted the wings will hopefully hold up x kilos of aircraft and passengers - in a similar way to a conventional aircraft.
I would rather to let the scientists currently working on the "idea" to continue as I am not very good with plugs and they seem better funded than me.