Steamをインストール
ログイン
|
言語
简体中文(簡体字中国語)
繁體中文(繁体字中国語)
한국어 (韓国語)
ไทย (タイ語)
български (ブルガリア語)
Čeština(チェコ語)
Dansk (デンマーク語)
Deutsch (ドイツ語)
English (英語)
Español - España (スペイン語 - スペイン)
Español - Latinoamérica (スペイン語 - ラテンアメリカ)
Ελληνικά (ギリシャ語)
Français (フランス語)
Italiano (イタリア語)
Bahasa Indonesia(インドネシア語)
Magyar(ハンガリー語)
Nederlands (オランダ語)
Norsk (ノルウェー語)
Polski (ポーランド語)
Português(ポルトガル語-ポルトガル)
Português - Brasil (ポルトガル語 - ブラジル)
Română(ルーマニア語)
Русский (ロシア語)
Suomi (フィンランド語)
Svenska (スウェーデン語)
Türkçe (トルコ語)
Tiếng Việt (ベトナム語)
Українська (ウクライナ語)
翻訳の問題を報告
It's called the helicopter.
Going to need a C class pilot license.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqIRCcWqKJY
Whether you can make a competent design is not the problem. The problem is, look at the statistics around driving and accidents. Now apply those same statistics to a scenario where these drivers are instead driving what essentially works out to ballistic missiles with a very light payload.
Anyone with a brain will go, "yeah no, ♥♥♥♥ that."
Hurdles to overcome, like.
Imagine if everyone had an electric car.
Now imagine the resource cost of providing every or at last every working person with one and then on the other side as a consequence of such an action the Earth runs out of resources as a hypothetical example where people would claim that it's more beneficial for the environment while it's really not and also this sort of shows in a parallel sense why the fossil fuel cars haven't been rooted out.
Electric cars have been around at least since "conventional" cars have been invented or implemented.
Because it's not as simple as say going like, here we have a new method let's just implement it and wing it and go with it and see where it goes, or alternatively stating everything will be all right if we just "override" or replace a method that's been sort of tried and true or (is) conventional in that sense.
In this way asking why we don't have flying cars, as for instance asking for why do cars brake down, why do we need mechanics or why would we need them is just like wondering about, I think: why not everyone takes a plane for their commute.
I tend to think of the moral of the story or the topic here being something along the lines of;
Some things? Sometimes; probably, all things always, not likely. Because...
Because the world is full of these wonderful ideas. In theory.
Yes I do... and I'm still waiting for mine...
Welcome to scientists aren't as smart as they think they are.
I also remember watching T.V. and Space 1999 and the movie 2001 a Space Odyssey...
The future isn't what it use to be.
The new bestselling book, "Help, I filed a flight plan and I just want to land at my house"
A lot easier to deal with navigation in two dimensions, not three. When it comes to road traffic
For instance, airplane pilots know to fly between a certain minimum cruising altitude (i think its 4000metres) and a max cruising altitude (about 10,050 m)
Know how many people who have road rage who make horrible driving decisions and put others at risk, not to mention themselves? The collateral damage of cars falling out of the sky and killing even more people that aren't even involved with the drivers, or...pilots
Well the point was "all" technology.. flying cars... how to keep them safe in the air... was ~all~ going to get to a point where it can be possible...
Kind of the way "driverless cars" are trying to be a thing now without them crashing all over the place ( as they are lol ) "driverless cars" isn't a new idea either, it's older then flying cars...