View Single Post
  #6  
Old August 24th 04, 04:19 AM
Rob Schneider
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Roger Halstead wrote in message . ..

Actually, Roger, you and I aren't too far apart in our opinions of
this, with perhaps one exception:

That goes entirely against the grain for almost any driver you can
find.


I agree completely.

You do realize that at the Chicago World's Fair back in the 30s they
were predicting those things to be common place within the next two
decades. They even had models of traffic systems. Seven decades
later it's still a dream.


Yes, and they will continue to be a dream for quite a while longer. I
think the cars are closer to being a reality than the aircraft, but
realistically neither is going to become a reality any time soon.

Part of me thinks this is a developing technology looking for a
problem to solve, and part of me thinks it could be a wonderful cure
for traffic congestion in the urban sprawls. Either way, it is so far
away from what this newsgroup is about we might as well be discussing
submarines.


I'd disagree there.
I think that homebuilding and experimentation will play a big part in
any kind of evolution when it comes to navigation.


I would love to see that happen, but my guess is the model airplane
folks will have more to do with the development of this system than
the homebuilders will.

As I see it, these new planes will be all fly-by-wire and very CPU-
and communications-intensive. That's a big leap from where most of GA
is these days, but not so far way from where the RC folks are.
They've already got fly-by-wire (or perhaps fly-by-wireless, with a
human brain for the CPU), on-board flight data recorders, and active
stabalization systems that will return the plane to straight and level
from any attitude.

You could throw a lot of these things into the air relatively
inexpensively, and best of all nobody would die while working the
kinks out of the system.

Also, I think the airlines might help push this along. People cost
money, and the more they can eliminate from the equation, the more
profitable their business. (Computers don't call in sick, either.*
Well, then again there are viruses and faulty code...)

My guess is GA (and homebuilding in particular) will be squeezed out
of the process from both ends, but like I said I'd love it if I were
wrong about that.

*(I was going to say "Computers don't show up for work intoxicated,
either" but I think that's a bit unfair to the thousands of commercial
airline pilots who do it right every day.)

OTOH to see the personal flight expanded much beyond today's type is
going to take a very large change in our society, not just aviation.


Very true. Kind of like the Segway - a good idea but it doesn't fit
well into our current definition of society. Although I think that
was once said about the automobile, too, and probably the horse
sometime long before that.


We have the capability to do these things now. The computer
programming would have to be done, but the automation capability is
there. Of course individual flying is far less efficient with fuel
than the automobile, and can you imagine the effects of a terrorist
interfering with the navigation system.

These craft would have to have the capability of using autonomous AIs
on them that could communicate as a group and to take orders from an
outside source. There are actually such programs underway for deep
sea exploration. I've forgotten the actual name which is one of those
yard and a half long monikers but I did some writing for my cousin for
a grant proposal.

Technologically we'd need a complete new revolution in electronics and
computing for this to become financially feasible on a large scale.


My guess is the expensive part (at least initially) is going to be
airframes and specifically the mechanical aspects of the fly-by-wire
control systems. Like you said, the rest of it is pretty much here.

No mater how I look at it, to be widely implemented I think it's as
far off as that traffic system from the World's Fair in Chicago.


I agree completely, though in this case I think the capabiltiy will be
there long before society is willing to accept it.

If it they actually make it work and the whole thing takes off, a lot
of people will get a good idea of what the early astronauts meant by
"spam in the can."


I don't think the claustrophobic are going to have to worry any time
soon, if ever.


I don't think they were refering to claustrophobia. Those early
astronauts were the cream of the crop from the military aviation
programs, and as I understand it they weren't all that happy about
blasting straight up and then falling back to earth like a stone.
They wanted something they could fly, not just sit in and press
buttons. Don't get me wrong - those early spacecraft were complex
vehicles to pilot, but there really wasn't much "flying" to them at
all.


Again, IMHO...

Rob