I'm sure some of u guys have seen this- using old tech to finally put a person as a passenger in an autonomous aircraft- give opinions
Another thing if u haven't heard, the passenger has zero manual control- you just give it a destination and wowa
>>912648
Really dumb. People aren't buying into the "self-driving car" thing, so why would they hop into an AAV? A car is one thing; if the computer driving the thing has a brain fart the driver can take over, this thing has no flight controls. Even if it did, roughly 1/2 of 1% of the American population is a pilot of any stripes, so the other 99.5% would be useless in the event of an emergency. There's a reason the military isn't letting optionally-piloted aircraft run any sort of troop transport or combat missions, there's too much that could go wrong. And if you think computers are infallible, I offer this for your consideration
>http://www.cnet.com/news/qatar-airways-a350-in-scary-aborted-takeoff-on-inaugural-us-flight/
Here's more information because OP is withholding:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N73NphOXkNk
http://www.skynews.com.au/business/tech/2016/01/07/chinese-drone-maker-unveils-human-carrier.html
This is called EHang 184. It flies for twenty-something minutes, using (presumably) electric motors. Besides flying autonomously, it's also going to be constantly connected to a control center that would be able help if something goes wrong.
Any widespread use of this machine in first-world countries would have to wait for the innovations that are stalling the adoption of civil drones around the world - self-separation, automated air traffic control and a self-contained flying and navigation ability.
When all that is done, these guys might be able to fly that vehicle unmanned in civil airspace, and convince the regulators that it's good enough for meat flights. It's not impossible, but it would take a lot of time and work, including from regulators who are not known for being quick or easy about their work.
There's not going to be an Uber-like disruption scenario, where people start flying these things willy-nilly and damn the consequences, too much is at stake and governments will have no trouble enforcing a ban.
>>912655
That's fear mongering and you should know it.
Human error causes the vast majority of car accidents. Even though today's cars are computerized enough to be susceptible to deadly bugs (ie that Honda model where the accelerator triggered itself and sent people to their deaths).
Even in aircraft, where you have a much higher standard for pilot training and selection, flight crew error causes the majority of accidents.
I doubt that thing´s actually able to fly with a passenger. Not with those tiny rotors/engines things. I mean, even the average e-bike got a bigger motor. Also no in-flight footage. Sketchy af.
Kinda reminds me of pic related.
>>912648
Actually pretty good idea.
Yeah, I know the China-meme is being parroted as well, deservingly, but as a concept, it might work. And it is not that China wasnt producing a lot of aircraft parts for Boeing and Airbus...
I just hope that the battery life gets better, and they add an emergency chute, as well as protective cage around the rotors for the next iteration.
>>912655
>And if you think computers are infallible
Wow, that sure showed me. Best stick to infallible human pilots instead.
If they used fuel-cells instead of pure battery, I'd me happier.
Everyone knows that the future of personal autonomous aircraft is with ground effect vehicles capable of short hops over obstacles. Why even try anything with quadcopters.
>>912741
pleaseshow?,
>>912648
i likeit!, oneless car!,,
,,in USA, freedom,, will never fly., TSA, inyour face.
>>912648
What will my life insurance think ?
>>912648
I think they'd be better off spending their time working on self-driving cars instead.
The problem with automated human-carrying aircraft is that,,,, there's no calling for such a thing. From anyone, anywhere. There's not even the slightest hint that any first-world country is the least bit interested in allowing such vehicles to be used. Who are they building it for?
Developing self-driving cars is a similar (but less complex) task, and there is already some legislative accommodations being made in the US and (western) Euroland.
>>912701
>Kinda reminds me of pic related.
>pic related
so stealthy it's never been seen
do you evn lift phaggit
>>912829
>using homophobic slurs in 2016
>>912916
> being a newfag in 2016
>>912655
>Look, steering wheeled, horseless cars are way too dangerous! Not even 1% of americas know how to drive it and 99% would be powerless if there was an emergency.
>>912916
>2016
>Thinking being a faggot is normal or acceptable
Fucking faggot
>>912916
>implying people who use the word faggot are afraid of gay people
Might want to get your shit for brains head checked out, poofter
>>912994
exactly
>>913024
actually faggot, homophobia is people who are afraid of- or who hate- gays
FAA would never allow it.
If they would ever allow it. They would be allowing ultralight helicopters in urban areas already.
>>912916
>Being on 4chan
>Expecting not to be called a faggot at least three or four times in a session of shitposting
>>912994
Yeeeeahhh... no the same thing dumbass.
>>912716
No it's not.
See >>912828
It's China trying to look smart and "innovative", when in reality it's shit that no one needs, and no one would care if it never happened.
Asia had one chance to refine existing tech and innovation from EUrope/US and Japan took it so long ago, kids today think Japan actually invented everything. Now the Chinese come along and give answers to questions nobody asked and we're supposed to nod and approve...
>>912994
Sorry for pointing out that your favorite thing is shit
>>912994
And they were right. Over 3 million people in the US alone have died from car accidents since 1899.
>>912916
welcome to 4chan newfag.
for future reference, any person who posts is a faggot. there are no exceptions. you're a faggot. i'm a faggot. i don't even find it offensive anymore. you're a faggot for posting by definition. it's nothing personal.
now go kill yourself fucking faggot
>>914233
pretty small number. since 1900, cardiovascular disease, such as heart failure, has been the number 1 killer every year except
>>914254
every year since 1918.
>>914254
no god damnit 1918 was the exception fuck my typing
>>912655
That video was fucking great.
