Uber Flying Cars: or pie in the sky dreaming?

[John Eacott]

Uber considers Melbourne as test sites for UberAir ‘flying cars’ project (https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/uber-considers-melbourne-as-test-sites-for-uberair-flying-cars-project/news-story/ae293a21f7ac050ace58c88041beb3cb)



FLYING cars summoned with a smartphone could be zipping through the skies above Melbourne within five years.

Victoria’s capital is locked in a battle with Sydney and other world cities to become the first international test bed for the flying vehicles.

Uber executives are meeting Australian politicians, transport authorities and property developers this week about its “flying car” project.

https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/dfa2f8e27b0e9ecd889206857df6bb1f?width=650

They have even identified possible routes for Uber aircraft they said would slash travel times between Melbourne airport and the city centre to “about five minutes”.

If Melbourne is selected, the Jetsons-style mode of transport could be tested as soon as 2020. And passengers might be able to share short, cheap flights to destinations by 2023.

Los Angeles and Dallas last year became the first two locations to test Uber’s ambitious urban air transport project. But Uber revealed it was also looking for a city outside the US to trial UberAir before the service is rolled out widely.

https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/d0a5732da583e1f816aab3335d050c91?width=1024

Uber aviation product head Nikhil Goel said the company had identified Melbourne and Sydney as promising candidates, owing to their population density, proximity to airports, and traffic congestion.

“Both cities are set to double in the next 30 years,” Mr Goel said. “And in congestion costs, both Sydneysiders and Melburnians spend a massive amount of time (in traffic).”

Mr Goel and aviation engineering director Mark Moore will meet transport ministers, regulators, real estate developers, banks, and firms including Qantas, this week to gauge interest. If it proceeds, Uber would work with local developers to build up to 25 “Skyports” in and around the winning city.

Travellers would request an UberAir ride using a smartphone app, catch an Uber car to a Skyport, an UberAir across the city, and another Uber car from the landing Skyport.

Uber’s aircraft would carry four passengers and a qualified pilot. Designed to be quieter and more efficient than helicopters, they would be custom-made electric vertical-takeoff-and-landing vehicles.

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority has said it would work with companies to “meet challenges” of urban flights.

Mr Moore said “extensive economic modelling” showed that by 2025, the cost would be “similar to UberX”, but it would be more costly before a large network of Skyports and 50-plus aircraft were set up.

Uber is due to announce the successful candidate before the end of the year. But Mr Moore said Australia already had a lead in one criteria: “One thing I’m loving is the weather here. In terms of visual flight moves, compared to London and Munich, I vote for Australia.”

[email protected]

https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/8e426fe655d9bdd5df1aa3da0877e236?width=316

[Thomas coupling]

It's bad enough forcing autonomous cars down our throats, never mind this bollox.
There isn't a hope in hell of driverless cars being main stream for atleast another 20 years. Driver assist yes but to allow a car to drive its passengers unassisted around everywhere we currently drive making all those unscripted decisions we make and extricating oneself out of dodgy situations - is a long long way off.

Uber airborne taxi's - 20 yrs plus.

[mickjoebill]

PR fail, launching the same week that a fixed wing crashed in a suburban street in Melbourne.
Mjb

[levo]

Dreams / Hype /Cobblers Levo.

[Fareastdriver]

All these pretty pictures of mega drones they don't seem to have any batteries.

[PDR1]

Obviously they operate on wifi - DUH!!!

PDR

[GrayHorizonsHeli]

I laugh at the "quieter than helicopters" claim.

no doubt a comparison could be made that technically my neighbors 2009 Harley Softail is quieter than his highly modified 1000 GSXR...its really pointless because they're both annoying at hell at any time of the day

these uber contraptions will not be quiet. They will be beyond annoying. And people will tire of the constant drone in very short time.

[[email protected]]

If the economics made such 'obvious' sense, there would already be R44s doing this - it is 'pie in the sky' - would love to see where they will get the battery technology to make this happen by 2020!

[jack11111]

Do you suppose there will be fires from high charging rates owing to desired fast turnaround?

[Ascend Charlie]

These things have only one use - to draw money from gullible people to "invest" in these fantasies of graphic designers and their cgi computers.

If a REAL helicopter with a locally-familiar pilot can't get a direct route from one part of Melbourne through the Moorabbin, Essendon and Tullamarine airspace to another part, how much chance does an Oooober-Choppa have, following its instructions from a call centre in India?

[DeltaNg]

There's certainly a market for intra-city transport in Sao Paulo info here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_in_S%C3%A3o_Paulo)

400 Helipads !

[Dick Smith]

The human power to self delude is clearly unlimited!

[Non-PC Plod]

Dont need batteries - all solar powered!

[PDR1]

these uber contraptions will not be quiet. They will be beyond annoying. And people will tire of the constant drone in very short time.

Actually these "uber contraptions" will indeed be very quiet - virtually silent, in fact. They will be as silent as room-temperature fusion power plants. The only sound you will hear is the sobbing and teeth-gnashing of the poor gullible morons who were so foolish as to invest their hard-earned cash in this imaginatory figment.

As others have pointed out - if the actual tasking was in any way feasible it would already be being served by light helicopters, flown by human pilots. Indeed it would have created a market for a new light helicopter with the simplicity of an R44, the masthead design of a B206 and a small integrated twin-engine power plant/gearbox assembly. Sadly that market has not emerged, so the concept clearly isn't viable.

PDR

[BluSdUp]

Quick charge will be done as they slowly descend onto commercial powerlines. Preferably the high tension kind for a real quick boost. ( Bzzzt!)
I shall purchase a Tram Ticket and watch the fire flies.

It must annoy these young Disruptures on their computers that their stuff dont work and that stuff takes time.
Dammed , sometimes I enjoy being, old grumpy, and right!

[Gordy]

They are deadly serious. I attended a briefing from Uber execs in the Los Angeles basin recently. Download and read their white paper here:

Uber Elevate (https://www.uber.com/info/elevate/)

[Ascend Charlie]

They did the same in Oz this week, prompting John to start this thread. Lovely CGI shots of a 5-seater club-car-seating capsule, under 4 piddly rotors. No comment on how much air those screaming little variable-RPM rotors will have to move to make the thing elevate itself, just a dreamy look on everybody as it glides away from a rooftop helipad to some destination in the sunset.

[etudiant]

Uber is still losing money hand over fist, so their ability to fund or to manage these ambitious efforts is not open ended. However, these announcements do help deflect the focus from the immediate operating results while management works to make the core business sustainable.

[John Eacott]

Melbourne (and Sydney) are almost a non-starter with maxed out ATC for the terminal and a difficult management at Tullamarine, who closed helicopter parking airside and forced the new start Air Melbourne (https://airmelbourne.rezdy.com/11231/heli-express-flight-melbourne-cbd-to-melbourne-airport) to operate to a pad at the Mercedes Benz dealership on the approach road off the Tulla freeway. Which necessitated a vehicle transfer, and for anyone landing airside they have to pay for a Melbourne Airport vehicle to transfer their pax to the outside entrance to the Terminal where they join the check in queues. Air Melbourne (https://airmelbourne.rezdy.com/11231/heli-express-flight-melbourne-cbd-to-melbourne-airport) boldly attempted airport shuttles with 109Es, but ambition seems to have outstripped demand.

Then there is the odd thing such as baggage, often 2-4 items, way above the capacity of most helicopters used on such jobs.

Quite how Uber think that they can overcome these known problems (Sydney Airport isn't any better), let alone that of city helipads, will be interesting to see. Regardless of their 'White Paper' and discussions with politicians.

[r22butters]

Uber considers Melbourne as test sites for UberAir ‘flying cars’ project (https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/uber-considers-melbourne-as-test-sites-for-uberair-flying-cars-project/news-story/ae293a21f7ac050ace58c88041beb3cb)

That's not a flying car!

[PDR1]

That's not a flying car!

A flying pig, perhaps?

PDR

[r22butters]

A flying pig, perhaps?

PDR

More like, when pigs fly we'll have "real" flying cars.

[FH1100 Pilot]

It's funny to me, the old curmudgeon, when I see these newfangled "flying taxis," or "pilot-less drone taxis" that are supposed to be the wave of the future. What's funny are all those multiple exposed propellers just above head-height: What regulatory agency is going to allow that? And yeah, I know they only run those props after the pax have boarded but they're still going to be operating in inner cities...supposedly.

The second thing that really makes me laugh are the depictions of the actual cabins: Flimsy, carbon-fibre shells like something you'd see on an amusement park ride. And the illustrations are always of shirt-sleeve weather. What about really hot climates? Or really cold? Or really rainy days? Will there be enough battery power to provide a decent air-conditioner or heater? Passengers WILL NOT put up with cold or hot or uncomfortable transportation devices. Ask any current (ground-bound) Uber driver.

Finally, as with any vertical flight vehicle used in an urban environment, I always say: "Don't forget the downwash!" Because there WILL be downwash. It will not be negligible or insignificant. The very idea of dropping down into the front plaza of an office building (where the fountain used to be perhaps, or the benches where the office workers from the bulding are having lunch?) is just silly. And if you can't take these things from point to point, what's the use? Might as well catch a real Uber. I mean, look at how ride-shares have reduced congestion in major cities so far!

I just don't see these things happening - not even in my wildest dreams. But hey, I've been wrong before...

[givdrvr]

I struggle as much as the anyone with imagining the leap required for these urban mobility concepts. I can say that industry in the US and NASA have committed significant resources to solve the challenge. One step forward was taken two weeks ago when the FAA accepted (not approved) the certificate application for SureFly, a first of its kind aerial vehicle with potential urban mobility applications. Another challenge is the below 1000ft AGL altitude Class B/C/D/E and Class G airspace world will need a new paradigm for rule making and its own ANSP (air navigation services provider) to address separation and flow control.
SureFly | Workhorse (http://workhorse.com/surefly)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yFZAPdYCck

[Thomas coupling]

It's a catch 22 scenario.
Without question low level urban air transport is coming. Small pods carrying up to 6+ people autonomously is coming.
The problem is - if these craft are mass produced and the price tumbles, bringing it into the reach of thousands, it will be an ATC nightmare.

[Ascend Charlie]

Small pods carrying up to 6+ people autonomously is coming.

How small will it be? How big is a 7-seater helicopter? B206L / 407 / AS 350? And there are multiple cities / councils where it has already been decreed that no landings by a vertical craft will happen. Multiple places that will not allow a helicopter to enter the airspace.

Coming? The only "coming" is by the people designing these toys on their computers, who regularly need to have their keyboards cleaned up.

[r22butters]

It's a catch 22 scenario.
Without question low level urban air transport is coming. Small pods carrying up to 6+ people autonomously is coming.
.

Why would this succeed where helicopter commuting has already failed?

[givdrvr]

Purpose built vehicles, economies of scale, gov-industrial complex support, and Wall St buy-in are a few that come to mind. Not to say that the SureFly is inspiring to look at, but priced less than an R22 with no single point of failure design and a ballistic recovery chute? Game-changer if it can get certified.

[jack11111]

What is the lowest level one can expect a parachute to be reliable?

[GrayHorizonsHeli]

I wonder why ATC even has to worry about them at all.

they'll be granted a specific airspace created just for them, and their awesome autonomous capabilities will mean that no one needs to track them or talk to them. Right? They're going to be opposing magnetic poles and never hit anything ever.

I figure though, they'll be falling from the sky like seagull turds at the beach.

Wont be safe in the air, wont be safe on the ground. I'm taking the subway......

[Thomas coupling]

Givdrvr - game changer for who? The weak link here is airspace NOT vehicle.
I don't think a ballistic recovery chute works below 500', does it?

[Ascend Charlie]

Purpose built vehicles, economies of scale, gov-industrial complex support, and Wall St buy-in are a few that come to mind. Not to say that the SureFly is inspiring to look at, but priced less than an R22 with no single point of failure design and a ballistic recovery chute? Game-changer if it can get certified.

And who will certify such a vehicle? One that is driven by a computer link to some program, perhaps by encrypted link. An astounding amount of testing will need to be done to show that an air vehicle can get itself from Home Base (storage) to a pickup point and land, somehow know that its passengers are on board, and that they are the pax who ordered the flight, not just queue-jumpers, and fly to a requested destination, land, let the pax out, ensure they are clear, and return to home base for a recharge. If it is all done through an app on their phone, then the whole show can be hacked.

The vehicle will require testing to ensure that it can still carry out its job of lifting 6 pax, even if a percentage of its motors are inoperable. On takeoff, if it suffers more than a critical number of motor failures, at what altitude can it fire the ballistic parachute, and will the load then drift off a building top to crash into the street hundreds of feet below? Not to mention that it doesn't have a heroic pilot to steer it away from the school filled with terrified kids. Crashworthiness. Battery safety. Air con. Some way of ensuring the passengers aren't goofing off without seat belts, trying to tip it past its CG, all leaning to one side to see the Grand Canyon or Golden Gate.

These tests will cost stultifying amounts of money, which then has to be recovered by the cost of the craft, which is passed on to the travelling public. Cheaper than an R22? Fuggeddabahdit.

[BluSdUp]

Here is a reality check!
OSL, Oslo main airport has to close one RWY for half an hr last week , then both for another half an hr. This caused diversions and delay.
The reason was realestate agents using remote-controlled toys under the ILS.
Parliament is to close the airspace for the nummnuts with a quick new law.

Also ask USAF et al how remote controlled and autonomous aircraft and toys fare in the say 2017 with a ZERO loss of airlines vs their statistics.

Lock at all the fantastic planes that has graced the sky.
It has to be 1 Practical 2 Economical 3 Safe

Ahhhh, Here is an idea : SUPERSONIC pax transport.
I rest my case. at cost index 6 and a piddly M 0,75.
I am outahere!
Taxi,,,,, Taxi,,, TAXI
Uber,,,,,,,,,,

[gator2]

I have struggled to discover what is the enabler of this concept, and why it is suddenly valid.

The only thing I can come up with is that electric motor power of multiple fixed pitch rotors has been enabled by much better gps, accelerometer, gyro, and control technology, and this in turn creates a cheaper machine with less failure modes, more opportunity for redundancy, and more opportunity for autonomous control.

Unfortunately, as evolution (and the B52) prove, we're not going to come up with a better way of accelerating air. It needs a crapload of hp. Mr Bernoulli and his friend Mr Einstien are not to be denied. Batteries are not good for a crapload of hp.

So the enabler of the air taxi is electric power. But without a battery (or other e power source) breakthrough the air taxi is stillborn. Even with a power breakthrough, its still a long long long way off due to all the other boring, (but very valid) reasons quoted in other posts. When a Tesla can go 1000 miles on a charge and be recharged in five minutes, we should start fearfully looking to the skies for some air taxis. And until then all these guys spending a ton of money proving you can scale up a quadcopter control system to people sized are wasting their time.

[BluSdUp]

That Surefly thing must have a future in heli logging. The multi Chopper.
Looks ridiculous.

[Washeduprotorgypsy]

I have struggled to discover what is the enabler of this concept, and why it is suddenly valid.


LIkely a technology that is just as old and evolved alongside prostitition.....paint by numbers?nah...wish fulfillment, yup!

I can't help but notice that there is often an uncanny correlation when something or some policy is self proclaimed blatantly as "Sure , True , Fair, Simple or Original, World Famous" usually the exact opposite is closer to the truth.

SureFly, Uber air taxi?

You never know ; the electric light bulb, indoor plumbing(my favourite), reliable turbine engines, the sound barrier ,the moon. Etc.etc would of been considered impossible heresy not so long ago. I d be fist pumping the air in victory too if I had managed to violate grandfathered approaches to vertical lift, a sketchy hover is a hover none the less. Disc loading, yeah somewhere s between the v22 and a harrier jump jet should be about right for a power/endurance hobbled machine. Ground effect, what's a 10% loss when the cowlings are plastic look alike carbon fibre......sorry, starting to harmonize with the choir here.

Should they pull the rabbit out of the hat and drones and robo,digi copters are planned to fill the skies like layered circuit board traces, I like Gray Horizons idea , take the subway. NO not to work. We are obsolete and unemployed now, time to cut loose. Drone struck visors down, unshaven and unhinged , day drinking in the stairwells to the rhythm of arc flash collisions in the sky.

Enough dystopia though, because if the future isn't robo-digi copters it's surely Robbo copters. Despite " only a mother or ab initio could love" being at the forefront of most minds. IT does bear some similarities to other evolutionary masterpieces the crow, magpie, seagull, cockaroach. All wretched in a way but mostly evolutionary brilliant.

A twin Robbo with radical plastic cowlings should be a worthy successor to the current king of accessible vertical lift. As good as it gets or what?