The same Ohio river valley where the Wright brothers pioneered human flight will soon manufacture cutting-edge electric vertical takeoff and landing aircraft.
2 minutes, 21 seconds after touch down, at approximately 5:35 p.m., the right main landing gear of the helicopter failed and the S-61 rolled over to the right. All main rotor blades struck the concrete helipad. Four passengers who were waiting to board were struck by the blades and killed. One of the blades, 28 feet, 10 inches (8.787 meters) long and weighing 209.3 pounds (94.9 kilograms) flew out over the building’s railing and fell alongside the building before crashing through an office window on the 36th floor. The main rotor blade broke into two segments, one of which fell to the street below, striking a pedestrian and killing him.
The airline had two more accidents because helicopters are just an oil leak surrounded by a million parts that want to fly apart
The reason I had to go so far back is because after that and a subsequent deadly accident nobody has tried doing a commuter airline with helicopters. Because it’s significantly more dangerous than flying a normal plane to a normal airport.
That’s a pretty good argument for why flying cars is a pretty stupid idea.  all the dangers of a regular car accident plus the several hundred or several thousand feet crash to the ground, and then all of the bloody, fiery horror of a second collision at that time. 
There would be many more of them in a small area and it’s a completely new type of flight system with which zero people have any type of flight experience. Not to mention the total lack of an air traffic control system and the fact that the risk of a crash is already pretty high.
Are we talking about eVTOL aviation technology in general or this specific airframe and idea? I’m not claiming this specific design is good or the use case is where we should be spending our R&D time on this tech.
What I am saying is that 90% of the responses in here amount to “this is dumb because rich people will use it, build trains.” If that’s the best we can’t expect from the dedicated technology community on this website it’s going to go nowhere fast.
That and seven people died when a helicopter tipped over over on top of a building
The airline had two more accidents because helicopters are just an oil leak surrounded by a million parts that want to fly apart
That was in 1977. Reaching that far back to find a horror story just goes to show how safe commercial aviation is.
The reason I had to go so far back is because after that and a subsequent deadly accident nobody has tried doing a commuter airline with helicopters. Because it’s significantly more dangerous than flying a normal plane to a normal airport.
No, there are still commuter helicopter flights between Manhattan and JFK. As well as EWR.
You can get a seat for $195: https://www.blade.com/jfk
7 people probably died in car accidents in the last hour, I guess cars are too dangerous to drive too.
Yes, but also yes.
Don’t forget about bicycles, there are 2-3 cyclist fatalities in the US every day.
We’re not talking about bicycles here. Try to pay attention to the conversation.
Parent comments were talking about the dangers of air taxis, helicopters, and cars. Why are bikes suddenly off limits?
Do you really need to have it explained to you how bicycles have nothing to do with this conversation? Lmao
Removed by mod
In a discussion about planes, no, they’re not. It’s clearly a strawman argument
That’s a pretty good argument for why flying cars is a pretty stupid idea.  all the dangers of a regular car accident plus the several hundred or several thousand feet crash to the ground, and then all of the bloody, fiery horror of a second collision at that time. 
Please explain to me how this type of aircraft is any more vulnerable to crashing or pilot error than any other.
There would be many more of them in a small area and it’s a completely new type of flight system with which zero people have any type of flight experience. Not to mention the total lack of an air traffic control system and the fact that the risk of a crash is already pretty high.
That’s plenty right there.
Are we talking about eVTOL aviation technology in general or this specific airframe and idea? I’m not claiming this specific design is good or the use case is where we should be spending our R&D time on this tech.
What I am saying is that 90% of the responses in here amount to “this is dumb because rich people will use it, build trains.” If that’s the best we can’t expect from the dedicated technology community on this website it’s going to go nowhere fast.
We’re not talking about the design of the aircraft at all, and this has nothing to do with the other responses. Are you even paying attention?