Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Military Transportation Technology

DARPA Kick-Starts Flying Car Program 136

coondoggie writes to share that DARPA is finally trying to make good on the promise of flying cars for our future with the new "Transformer" (TX) project. "DARPA said the vehicle will need to be able to drive on prepared surface and light off-road conditions, as well as support Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL) features. The TX will also support range and speed efficiencies that will allow for missions to be performed on a single tank of fuel. DARPA said the TX will 'provide the flexibility to adapt to traditional and asymmetric threats by providing the operator unimpeded movement over difficult terrain. In addition, transportation is no longer restricted to trafficable terrain that tends to makes movement predictable.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

DARPA Kick-Starts Flying Car Program

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Ground vs Air (Score:2, Insightful)

    by jimbolauski ( 882977 ) on Monday January 04, 2010 @06:21PM (#30647272) Journal
    By the time hover cars are available, cars should be driving by themselves so it shouldn't be a problem until computers start getting road rage.
  • I'm guessing it's an argument more like, "why are we allocating a bunch of money to [x], when [priority y] is more important, and we don't have unlimited money".

    It's an odd sort of argument, in that it make sense to some extent, but in practice has to be ignored to some extent also, or we'll never do anything except really basic stuff. For example, if you have extra money you're thinking of donating to charity, why donate to the EFF, or to support an artist you like, when kids are dying in Africa; that's surely more important, right?

    The more high-level question makes some sense though: is our current overall allocation of money to the military the proper level, or should it be reduced to free up money for other priorities?

  • by RyanFenton ( 230700 ) on Monday January 04, 2010 @06:37PM (#30647498)

    One of the first tags on this story was "fixtheeconomyfirst"... but the core problem in our economy is that the dichotomy between wealthy investors and owner calss, and the mass of stagnant income earner class who mostly provide service to eachother and the wealthy. Flashy inefficient technology like these are about all we can do at this point to get anything out of the currently rather sheepish investors/owners. Our political system will NOT be fixing this situation anytime soon - not when money spent on campaigns is considered "political speech", and corporations are counted as people for those related rights.

    Still, if most golden-parachute equipped managers can be convinced to sign a bankruptcy inducing contract just because one of these things are SO flying-car-smexy, and they can only get it through these government channels fully equipped to extract that money - then there's a chance to reduce their political power. And that WOULD fix the economy, in a roundabout way.

    Not going to happen - but like with cheap flying cars, one can always dream.

    Ryan Fenton

  • by Arancaytar ( 966377 ) <arancaytar.ilyaran@gmail.com> on Monday January 04, 2010 @09:08PM (#30649472) Homepage

    This will probably be something that's only for military use of some kind.

    Unlike cryptology, digital computers and the internet? Steel? Military applications have driven innovation for--- well, forever really.

    The depressing thing about human nature is that if we weren't always busy coming up with more efficient ways to kill each other, technology might be advancing far more slowly.

Serving coffee on aircraft causes turbulence.

Working...