Comment by imglorp | Hacker News Reader

Comment by imglorp | Hacker News Reader

I'm sorry to bring a cart of wet blankets but this is not a good idea. It must do nothing well because of conflicting requirements between air (low weight and constant speed engine), road (heavy gear like collision protection, transmission, road tires, etc), and lugging all that Transformer magic around. You have to drive to an airport in order to fly to another airport with limited range, and then drive again.

Personal door-to-door aviation is here already: multirotors with what's basically drone software are going to explode in range and utility. The regulations will need to catch up. Kurt Moller had it right but couldn't execute on the vision.

Who said that it NEEDS to do it "well"? The fact that it can do it at all is great!

This may not be for everyone, but it is exactly how progress is made and mankind moves forward ...

I've got some bad news:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadable_aircraft

It's been done. It's a stupid idea.

It's been "done" is the worst reason to stop working on anything.

Think - it can be "made better". Again - that is how mankind progresses forward ...

Not only that, but I don’t want to put my airplane at risk of a fender bender that leaves it unairworthy 600 miles from home.

Solution in search of a problem is what I see.

Powered lift aircraft will be unable to provide widespread personal door-to-door aviation. Even if the flight control, endurance, and regulatory problems can be solved they can't safely take off or land anywhere near trees, tall buildings, or overhead power lines.

Same applies to winged aircraft.

I'm fine with having dedicated landing pads, much like we have dedicated parking lots.

Right. Some of the drone delivery services are going this route. Set up a pad with a little clearance and the machine will spot its marker. You don't need a ton of clearance.

It's far different than a 1000m runway with all the support infra.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com