If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#131
|
|||
|
|||
Future of Electronics In Aviation
On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 03:15:03 GMT, wrote in
: I work with Traffic Engineers You must know Jerry Crabill and Tramm Hartzog. |
#132
|
|||
|
|||
Future of Electronics In Aviation
On Jun 21, 7:58*pm, "Peter Dohm" wrote:
"Le Chaud Lapin" wrote in ... Part of the problem with PAV is not that people do not want it, but no one has made anything practical yet. If someone were to make a PAV that satisfied the criteria outlined by NASA/CAFE/PAV, there would be tremenous consumer response. -Le Chaud Lapin- Not from me; and from what I have read on this thread, the possible market in this newsgroup can be counted on the fingers of one hand. *Of that small number, you would be the only one willing to spend money--presuming that you are willing to do so. Which is why I said what I said in my OP. Looking at all the links on the web, there is an enormous interest in PAV's, and a lot of the interest comes from researchers at respected universities, industry, EAA, DARPA, FAA, DOT, NASA, government-funded think-tanks, and especially the general public. If a PAV were created that met the objectives outlined by CAFE, and were low-cost, automobile, many would buy one. Many of these interested parties are experienced pilots themselves, and some of them are highly-respected aeronautical designers who understand many of the technical problems presented in this thread, yet they still persist. Why then, in this group, is there such a resistance to a PAV? [Also, if anyone knows, is the overall sentiment in r.a.p. toward PAV's representative of GA pilots as a whole?] -Le Chaud Lapin- |
#133
|
|||
|
|||
Future of Electronics In Aviation
In rec.aviation.piloting Le Chaud Lapin wrote:
On Jun 21, 10:05?pm, wrote: In rec.aviation.piloting Le Chaud Lapin wrote: On Jun 21, 4:15?pm, wrote: Your basic premise is utter nonsense and naive. Gee-whiz components will just drive the cost of flying up, further reducing the pilot population. And don't even bother with you childish blather about "commodities" as the mass market has to exist BEFORE something can become a commodity. Hmm..are you sure? Yes. There are a lot of products that were created on the premise that, even though there is not yet a market present, the market will exist by virtue of the product: * ball-point pen * sticky-notes from 3M * Sony Walkman, Discman * Atari game console * waverunner * Kevlar * Velcro * microwave oven * various medicines and lubricants for psychosexual impotence and frigidity * gasoline additives * mosquito repellant * baby wipes * polarized sunglasses * pet rock (came and went) * USB memory sticks * DVD player The creators of these products speculate that the market might want the product, but the speculation is grounded in reason. And all those products are free compared to the price of an airplane. The most expensive thing on your list of wonders is at least 3 orders of magnitude less in price than an airplane ever could be. But at least it shows that, if someone builds something that consumers will want, before the consumers know what it is, the consumers will still want it. In case of low-cost PAV, it is already known that the consumers will want it. No, that is not known, and to become a commondity the price has to get down to the level of a microwave oven, which is never going to happen. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#134
|
|||
|
|||
Future of Electronics In Aviation
On Jun 22, 10:55*am, wrote:
In rec.aviation.piloting Le Chaud Lapin wrote: The most expensive thing on your list of wonders is at least 3 orders of magnitude less in price than an airplane ever could be. But at least it shows that, if someone builds something that consumers will want, before the consumers know what it is, the consumers will still want it. In case of low-cost PAV, it is already known that the consumers will want it. No, that is not known, and to become a commondity the price has to get down to the level of a microwave oven, which is never going to happen. It would be hard, indeed, to bring cost of PAV too few hundred US dollars. But many people would be willing to pay the same for a PAV as they would for their automobile. -Le Chaud Lapin- |
#135
|
|||
|
|||
Future of Electronics In Aviation
On Jun 22, 2:01 am, Le Chaud Lapin wrote:
But at least it shows that, if someone builds something that consumers will want, before the consumers know what it is, the consumers will still want it. In case of low-cost PAV, it is already known that the consumers will want it. Just like the Segway. I have seen ONE of those things. Really popular. Everybody wanted one, didn't they? Dan |
#136
|
|||
|
|||
Future of Electronics In Aviation
In rec.aviation.piloting Le Chaud Lapin wrote:
On Jun 22, 10:55?am, wrote: In rec.aviation.piloting Le Chaud Lapin wrote: The most expensive thing on your list of wonders is at least 3 orders of magnitude less in price than an airplane ever could be. But at least it shows that, if someone builds something that consumers will want, before the consumers know what it is, the consumers will still want it. In case of low-cost PAV, it is already known that the consumers will want it. No, that is not known, and to become a commondity the price has to get down to the level of a microwave oven, which is never going to happen. It would be hard, indeed, to bring cost of PAV too few hundred US dollars. But many people would be willing to pay the same for a PAV as they would for their automobile. A lot of people would buy an airplane if they could buy a brand new one for $15k to $30K no matter whether it had electronic trickery in it or not, but there is no way to get the price that low unless the number of pilots increases by over two orders of magnitude and even then it would be difficult to achieve. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#137
|
|||
|
|||
Future of Electronics In Aviation
On Jun 22, 12:35 pm, wrote:
A lot of people would buy an airplane if they could buy a brand new one for $15k to $30K no matter whether it had electronic trickery in it or not, but there is no way to get the price that low unless the number of pilots increases by over two orders of magnitude and even then it would be difficult to achieve. There is a way, but it involves two things: Simplicity and personal responsibility. Simplicity of construction so that there isn't a bunch of stuff that's not necessary to achieve safe flight, and personal responsibility that accepts that there's personal risk in flying and holds the manufacturer only to safe construction and performance parameters, so he's not required to charge so much more for an airplane than it's really worth just so that he can buy huge amounts of insurance to protect himself from greedy lawyers and stupid juries and incompetent pilots who blame everyone else for their own mistakes. There really isn't much to a basic airplane like a Citabria or Cessna 150. Much of its value is tied up in the engine and instruments, both necessary, and radios, some of which are not all that necessary. The manufacturers of those things also have to charge far more than the inherent value of these items because they get sued, too . The mechanic has to buy lots of insurance, and so does the airport operator and the fuel provider and so on. Costs get way beyond reason. Until society gets fed up enough to do something concrete about it, nothing will change, even with an "affordable PAV" which itself would make things even worse just by allowing even more incompetent people into the air. Just look at the deaths of people using jet-skis or Quads and how their manufacturers have to insure themselves. If we can buy a brand-new automobile, a vehicle that is far more complex than a Cessna 150, for around $15K, we should be able to buy the much simpler airplane for the same price. But we can't because airplanes kill the unwary much more readily and their owners or passengers or the survivors of the owners are qick to capitalize on the losses. Technology is not the answer to lowering costs; simplicity and responsibility are. Dan |
#138
|
|||
|
|||
Future of Electronics In Aviation
|
#139
|
|||
|
|||
Future of Electronics In Aviation
On Jun 22, 1:14*pm, wrote:
On Jun 22, 2:01 am, Le Chaud Lapin wrote: But at least it shows that, if someone builds something that consumers will want, before the consumers know what it is, the consumers will still want it. In case of low-cost PAV, it is already known that the consumers will want it. * * * Just like the Segway. I have seen ONE of those things. Really popular. Everybody wanted one, didn't they? Not sure if they did. I remember there was a lot of interest, but one must not confuse intellectual curiosity with inclination to purchase. The average consumer simply does not have an extra $5000US ($10,000US in France) for a vehicle that moves slower than the average teenager can run (~20km/h, 12.5mph) and requires 4-6 hours to charge for a range of up to 40km. By contrast, here is a machine that is 1/10 of the cost that does, with some exceptions, the same thing. With this alternative, unlike with the segway, the human actually has to balance himself/herself to keep from falling: http://urbanscooters.com/cgi-bin/urb...ml?id=7wbs5GVf The value proposition is a bit hard to swallow. Last year I paid $8100 for a VFR-800, a machine with top speed of 260km/hr, outrageously generous fun during acceleration and cornering, able to carry a passenger, and has essentially unlimited range with quick refueling. It does not do well on cobblestone streets or on sidewalks in city parks, but, when in such environments, I prefer to walk. This is why objectivity in assessing the value of the product is important. If someone were to make a PAV that did not cost 10x that of a low-end kit plane, but was roughly in line with cost of automobile, with all the features outlined by NASA/CAFE/PAV, consumers would respond with purchases (or rentals at least). -Le Chaud Lapin- |
#140
|
|||
|
|||
Future of Electronics In Aviation
Nomen Nescio wrote in
: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- From: Le Chaud Lapin Not sure if they did. I remember there was a lot of interest, but one must not confuse intellectual curiosity with inclination to purchase. The average consumer simply does not have an extra $5000US ($10,000US in France) I'll leave it to others to ponder the question "Why would someone who claims to live in Texas, and also claims NOT to be a "MX sockpuppet", be quoting the price of a Segway in France"? I can't resist a good " told you so!" Bertie |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FA: 1-Day-Left: 3 Advanced AVIATION Books: Aviation Electronics, Air Transportation, Aircraft Control and Simulation | Mel[_2_] | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | September 8th 07 01:37 PM |
FA: 3 Advanced AVIATION Books: Aviation Electronics, Air Transportation, Aircraft Control and Simulation | Derek | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | September 3rd 07 02:17 AM |
FA: 1-Day-Left: 3 AVIATION Books: Aviation Electronics, Air Transportation, Aircraft Control and Simulation | Jeff[_5_] | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | September 1st 07 12:45 PM |
FA: 3 AVIATION Books: Aviation Electronics, Air Transportation, Aircraft Control and Simulation | Jon[_4_] | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | August 24th 07 01:13 AM |
FA: 3 ADVANCED AVIATION Books: Aviation Electronics, Air Transportation, Aircraft Control and Simulation | Larry[_3_] | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | August 6th 07 02:23 AM |