Flying In

[Guest Plastic]

I've been thinking on how to solve our traffic problem. There's Park&RIdes but there's a limited amount of people that will fit on buses. There's trains but it's costly and very difficult to put up lines in time.

So I've considering another soloution........flying. No not flying in personal hoover cars like Jetsons but public transportation.

A hoovering/ggliding vehicle would be several times larger than a bus. It would pick you up in aparking lot in say Katy..fly straigh up like a helicopters tilt it's possible rotors and fly straight into town liek anairplane. WHen it's landing time the whole process would reverse and it would tilt the possible rotors down again and go straight down. We could clear enough space for a transit center where you could ctch the rail and different buses.

It takes no tracks,can go far,goes fast,and has no traffic to be involved in. I thinkit would work, do you think major metropolitain transit authoritites would buy it?

[nmainguy]

So I've considering another soloution........flying. No not flying in personal hoover cars like Jetsons but public transportation.

I thinkit would work, do you think major metropolitain transit authoritites would buy it?

Absolutly!

[WesternGulf]

Great idea.

[Jeebus]

How high can a craft go before it enters FAA controlled airspace?

[Guest Plastic]

I don't kknow but as long as the pilots don't get drunk it should work alright.

[TheNiche]

I've been thinking on how to solve our traffic problem. There's Park&RIdes but there's a limited amount of people that will fit on buses. There's trains but it's costly and very difficult to put up lines in time.

So I've considering another soloution........flying. No not flying in personal hoover cars like Jetsons but public transportation.

A hoovering/ggliding vehicle would be several times larger than a bus. It would pick you up in aparking lot in say Katy..fly straigh up like a helicopters tilt it's possible rotors and fly straight into town liek anairplane. WHen it's landing time the whole process would reverse and it would tilt the possible rotors down again and go straight down. We could clear enough space for a transit center where you could ctch the rail and different buses.

It takes no tracks,can go far,goes fast,and has no traffic to be involved in. I thinkit would work, do you think major metropolitain transit authoritites would buy it?

There are some people, albeit very few, who currently live way out in the countryside and commute via light or ultralight aircraft into smaller airports in metropolitan areas. Its not that your idea couldn't work if implemented en masse throughout a broad region...the safety engineering aspects are probably the most daunting problem, considering that 1) A disproportionate number of stalled vehicles I come across are Metro's busses, and 2) I don't feel comfortable as a homeowner having anything with from Metro flying overhead. But aside from that, political pressures would kill it almost instantaneously. Republicans wouldn't like it because its an unproven concept, thus financially risky. Democrats wouldn't like it because it'd foster really far-flung suburban growth; they'd probably also argue that, pilots being disproportionately white, would be taking the jobs of bus drivers, who are disproportionately black. Libertarian types also wouldn't like it because its bigger government.

[TJones]

I've been thinking on how to solve our traffic problem. There's Park&RIdes but there's a limited amount of people that will fit on buses. There's trains but it's costly and very difficult to put up lines in time.

So I've considering another soloution........flying. No not flying in personal hoover cars like Jetsons but public transportation.

A hoovering/ggliding vehicle would be several times larger than a bus. It would pick you up in aparking lot in say Katy..fly straigh up like a helicopters tilt it's possible rotors and fly straight into town liek anairplane. WHen it's landing time the whole process would reverse and it would tilt the possible rotors down again and go straight down. We could clear enough space for a transit center where you could ctch the rail and different buses.

It takes no tracks,can go far,goes fast,and has no traffic to be involved in. I thinkit would work, do you think major metropolitain transit authoritites would buy it?

Sure, that is much cheaper than a few gallons of deisel in a Metro bus. Where do I sign up ?

[hokieone]

its funny he mentions the jetsons because his last two ideas have been moving sidewalks to get through downtown and flying buses. Hey trains are costly, good to hear flying is much cheaper. I think the next suggestion will be that we need robot maids named Rosie to clean up downtown. Or a large company called Cogsworth's Cogs to come in and add new jobs to the area.

[nmainguy]

I don't kknow but as long as the pilots don't get drunk it should work alright.

Plastic,

So you won't be piloting anything, right?

[RedScare]

Given the maximum commute will only be 40 miles or less, why do we need tilt rotors? A Sikorsky Sea Stallion or Sea Dragon can carry 55 passengers at up to 150 to 170 knots...175 to 200 mph. That would get commuters from Lake Conroe to Downtown in 15-20 minutes.

Of course, I don't know where you get the idea that these things are cheap to buy, maintain or operate. Fuel alone would wipe out METRO's budget. The Sea Stallion and Sea Dragon each get approximately .5 miles per gallon. A METRO Park & Ride bus gets about 5 mpg.

The reason trains are getting such interest is because they use LESS petroleum, not more.

[dbigtex56]

I don't kknow but as long as the pilots don't get drunk it should work alright.

I can just imagine the sobriety tests:

"Sir, can you step out of the vehicle?"

And if they do...they're drunk.

[Guest Plastic]

Given the maximum commute will only be 40 miles or less, why do we need tilt rotors? A Sikorsky Sea Stallion or Sea Dragon can carry 55 passengers at up to 150 to 170 knots...175 to 200 mph. That would get commuters from Lake Conroe to Downtown in 15-20 minutes.

Of course, I don't know where you get the idea that these things are cheap to buy, maintain or operate. Fuel alone would wipe out METRO's budget. The Sea Stallion and Sea Dragon each get approximately .5 miles per gallon. A METRO Park & Ride bus gets about 5 mpg.

The reason trains are getting such interest is because they use LESS petroleum, not more.

I didn't say we'd use tilt rotors but something like it for urban transit.

The reason why say tilt is cause it'd be easier taking of and landing. Landing airplane style is harder and alot less safe exspecially in harsh weateher. Landing airplane style might work outer town but it won't Downtown,there's simply too little space. There's have o be a specially disginated space abou thew size of a block where "hooverbuses" could park. There's be no need to land diagonally, just hoover over the spot and land straight down.

And yest it would be cheaper than train, it costs alot ot dig and setup track. nd hoovering all the way would work on a short trip. If you were to go from Downtown to Northwest Mall I doubt you'd put the thing in plane mode. Soon as you put the engines horizontal it's time to turn them down and land. It sounds far fetched but the people in London have already got somthing like it ready to fly.

Sky Taxi will fly like a plae,not sure how it will takeoff and land however. It would be just like a regular taxi butit flys in the air.

[RedScare]

Again, why not use helocopters?

[nmainguy]

Way back in the 70's when Kenneth Schnitzer was developing Greenway Plaza, they had a STOL (Short Take Off and Landing) airstrip designed to be built on top of a garage that was to span from Weslyan to Buffalo Spdwy.

Of course it never happened as Plastic's idea would'nt happen. Too loud. Too dangerous. Not an effective and cost efficient way to move people.

You want this thing landing behind your townhouse???

How about this?

Or this? So quiet and unobtrusive.

[Guest Plastic]

Again, why not use helocopters?

Helicopters and that fast.

[RedScare]

Helicopters and that fast.

150 to 175 mph is too slow for a 40 mile commute? Are you stoned?

Alright, then. Here was your original question:

"...do you think major metropolitain transit authoritites would buy it?"

Here is my answer:

No.

[Guest Plastic]

Slow,yes it is. 175 is about the speed that planes go when they're taking off.

Planes glide most of the time and therefore use less energy. A helicopter can't go nearly as fast as a plane and if the engine stops, you're screwed.

[hokieone]

Can we please send this all to "thread heaven" It can join the anything in Beltway 8 is downtown and moving sidewalks discussions. Not to mention we might want to hide it because it might prompt local authorities to either call for immediate spelling classes for all HAIF members or a drug bust at some members houses.

[CE_ugh]

Slow,yes it is. 175 is about the speed that planes go when they're taking off.

Planes glide most of the time and therefore use less energy. A helicopter can't go nearly as fast as a plane and if the engine stops, you're screwed.

Glide into a physics class.

[mike1]

Take it from someone who served aboard aircraft carriers-- helicopters of the size needed for mass transit would be expensive to maintain, prone to mechanical breakdown, and extremely loud. Someone mentioned not wanting one of these things flying overhead; I would modify that to say that you wouldn't want one of these things within several miles of your house!

Implement this plan, and we would start seeing stories in the Houston Chronicle about chronic hearing loss and migraine headache epidemics among Houston residents!

[mike1]

You know...another problem with this idea (among many) is that helicopters create considerable ground vibration. If you ever been stuck in traffic next to somebody with their Hip-Hop music going "Thump

[Guest Plastic]

First of all I didn't say helicopter. Something modified with jet engines or fans that tilt. And beside sit wouldn't hoover most of the time it'd fly.

Only time it'd hoover is taking off and landing. It'd be in a big park and ride lot away from cars on takeoff and noisy downtown when landing. WIth all the building blocking the noise and the general bustle of downtown you probrably wouldn't notice.

[mike1]

First of all I didn't say helicopter. Something modified with jet engines or fans that tilt. And beside sit wouldn't hoover most of the time it'd fly.

Only time it'd hoover is taking off and landing. It'd be in a big park and ride lot away from cars on takeoff and noisy downtown when landing. WIth all the building blocking the noise and the general bustle of downtown you probrably wouldn't notice.

To your first point, Herrier jets aren

[nmainguy]

Slow,yes it is. 175 is about the speed that planes go when they're taking off.

Planes glide most of the time and therefore use less energy. A helicopter can't go nearly as fast as a plane and if the engine stops, you're screwed.

Planes glide most of the time? On what planet?

Have you ever HEARD a jump jet take off or land?

Do you know what a jump jet is?

Do you really want large, obtrusive and noisy aircraft taking off and landing at all times of the day and night in heavily occupied areas?

Did you see the pics I posted of the STOLs? Is that what you want?

Did you read the post that said this has already been discussed in the past and was rejected as..well, just stupid?

Do you ever respond to specific posts?

Could someone close this thread and put us out of our misery?

[Guest Plastic]

I already thought of the problem. There would be a glass enclosure for the bus to land in. It wouldn't let people in while the craft is taking off or landing.

As for gliding yes, planes glide as opposed to hoover. Now they are powered but htat's still a form of gliding.

As for this idea being stupid, Maglev would be the next best thing. While it flies it would be extremely expspensive.

[mike1]

I already thought of the problem. There would be a glass enclosure for the bus to land in. It wouldn't let people in while the craft is taking off or landing.

As for gliding yes, planes glide as opposed to hoover. Now they are powered but htat's still a form of gliding.

As for this idea being stupid, Maglev would be the next best thing. While it flies it would be extremely expspensive.

You have no idea what you are talking about. I don't think a glass retaining wall could contain a force of this magnitude:

http://www.aviationexplorer.com/747_engine_blast.htm

There are more gory examples of what jet blast can do if you care to seach the Internet, but I hope you get the idea from this.

[RedScare]

Hey Plastic, if this is such an inexpensive and brilliant idea, why is not ONE transit agency in the world doing it? Why is no one even considering it?

Could it be some of your figures are off a tad?

[infinite_jim]

i call troll, subtle, but still, a troll.

[dbigtex56]

Practical though these suggestions may be, let's stick with tried-and-true technology, such as hybrid diesel/electric buses producing wormholes through which the space/time continuum is warped, and you arrive at your destination before you leave home.

Think of the savings!

[Guest Plastic]

Someone is doing it I told you, a company called SKy Taxi is taking off in London.

And cities around the nation where thinking about having a helicopter system. Theyre'd by heliports located of freewas in cities like Atlanta.

There was even a helisystem in Houston. Remember the heliport next to the George R . Brown Convention Center? And that big hanger like facility atop the Reliant Energy Building Downtown? That was going to be a helipad for businessmen to come to Downtown ontop the building or at the Brown to get to meetings. The traffic is so bad that CEOs and such were missing their meetings or had to get here really early,so they established the helisystem to help them get around.

It for some reason never caught on and the pad at the GRB closed and the one atop Reliant Energy never opened.