Re: They're not taxis
Bingo. That's the biggest real issue with these, and is the reason no one uses helicopters as taxis. Making a battery operated helicopter doesn't solve any of the fundamental problems with their business model.
15 publicly visible posts • joined 25 Apr 2008
So far, evtols have a worse safety record even than helicopters. The VX4 prototype (mentioned in the article) was destroyed in a crash last year, hence the need for a new certificate from the CAA. And the other front runner, Joby, similarly had a crash which destroyed the aircraft in 2022. Fortunately they were remotely piloted in both cases.
It's one thing being safer in theory, but the real world has a habit of sending icebergs towards your unsinkable ships.
Thanks for the calcs, but that emphasizes how terrible an investment these are for the private sector. Considering construction began in 2009, they've already been stacking up losses for 14 years. And that's not including development work carried out before then. Most investors like to see a return on their investment within their lifetime.
Nuclear power is needed, but we should probably expect more taxpayer involvement if these are to be built in larger numbers.
This all sounds pretty great, but I'm pretty doubtfull they'll be able to develop this in three years.
I like the idea of continually lapping the moon to avoid sitting in the lunar shade though. According to a quick back of an envelope calculation, it would only need to go a shade under 10 mph to do this. Tricky, but possible I should think. Perhaps easier than trying to insulate something in near absolute zero conditions for 14 days at least.
"Crucially, this will come after the first reading in the Commons, the main hurdle that bills currently have to face"
The first reading is where the title of the bill is read out in parliament - they don't actually debate anything until the second reading - so this will come before any hurdles at all.
Resolution: 1 metre. Size of the Apollo Lander: four metres across. So theoretically possible, but the best you're going to get is a few fuzzy pixels of a slightly different colour to the rest of the surface. And since the images are in b/w, even harder to distinguish.
So we might get images of the landers, but they won't be good enough to be sure that's it's actually them. Shame really.
Anyway, nothing will satisfy the conspiracy nuts, they'll claim any images are faked anyway.
Hmm...
Reg said: "American boffins believe they have developed a process which can make the oldschool lights more efficient than energy-saving lamps."
Press release says: "The process could make a light as bright as a 100-watt bulb consume less electricity than a 60-watt bulb"
So that's not more efficient than an energy efficient bulb is it? The equivalent flourescent uses only 18 watts IIRC.
Correct me if I'm wrong please.
From innovative market leader, to Trade Mark troll in just a few years. Shame.
Still, I don't think they have much chance here. The US requires use of the mark on the products listed in the app. If the applicant has no intention to use it in those categories, this counts as "fraud" and the whole thing can get thrown out. This has been a highly successful approach in a number of recent high profile cases. And yes, it's clearly now a generic term, although may not have been at the time. Hard to tell though - the thing I use to clean the floor says Dyson on the side, but I call it a Hoover anyway...
and just generally agree with pretty much everyone - The Reg needs to either stick to what it's (relatively) good at, and report IT related news, or start learning the basics on impartiality. I don't think I've ever read a more opinionated series of articles on Politics since I (accidentaly mind you) read a copy of the Mail.
Buck up Reg, I expect better.
Isn't the problem with wind energy the fact that when the wind stops blowing, the lights go out? And conventional fossil fuel power stations can't ramp themselves up to compensate sufficiently quickly enough, so have to be running at the level they would be without the wind power anyway? So wind effectively generates no useful electricity as it can't be stored.
Or have I been listening to the nay-sayers too much? Is there any way that, using current technology, any of these wind power installations can generate useful electricity?