One area that I have been asked to comment on, is why predictions fail. I recently came across an interesting page in Wikipedia that discussed Fords Flying Car. I thought this was an interesting example of where the technology was there, but other outside forces prevented the prediction from becoming a reality.
The Ford Motor Company in the 50’s performed a feasibility study and they conclude that both the technology and market supported a flying car. They saw interests from the public service sector such as emergency response, police, military, and luxury transportation. The concept may have been fine, but the supporting infrastructure wasn’t there. When Ford approached the FAA it was identified that the means for air traffic control was inadequate for the amount of flying cars that Ford was proposing.
In 1937 Waldo Waterman had produced the Watermans’ Aerobile powered by a Studebaker engine that could fly at a speed of 112 MPH and on the ground at 56 MHP. The technology existed, but the government wasn’t ready for every home to have a plane in their garage.
What has been developed in this market space is lightweight helicopters for niche markets. What was lost in the development was a low cost model that could be called the “peoples” Aerobile. It could be argued that the prediction was 70-80 years ahead of its time. Maybe in the next twenty years we will see an affordable flying car that is capable of both ground and in air transportation. Maybe when we master gravity we will see a host of not just flying cars, but flying personal transports.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_car
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Mark - your post really calls out how one group/agency can really stop progress in another field. It's interesting that this hasn't been challenged by the public yet. I wonder if this would be overturned if the demand were present?
I have been watching the folks in Washington talk about our broadband - and how we are now 15th in the world in terms of speed and service (having dropped from 4th). It seems that this would have the demand behind it to drive a change - and yet it hasn't changed. I wonder if people are just complacint with technology that works?
Steve,
I agree with your comment that if the public demand was there the agency would relent. I believe that our culture plays an important role in determining how import different technologies are to us. An example, due to our love affair with our cars, we think nothing of getting in our car and driving to the bank to do business. In Estonia all banking is done on line and it is not unusual for a customer not to have visited their bank for several years.
Mark,
Good article on the flying car, however I feel that it may not be a “failed prediction” merely delayed (considerably if you consider Watermans’ Aerobile of 1937).
It appears that there are many flying cars ready to make the retail market within the next 10 years or less. The most promising is Woody Norris’s Air Scooter who has a working prototype that he claims will sell cheaply - $50k and more importantly you will not need a pilot’s license if you fly under 400 feet in non-restricted airspace. Of course, I’m not very certain if that will get you from point A to point B of your intended destinations in very many circumstances, but it does look promising!
See his link here:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/04/15/60minutes/main688454.shtml
Here are a couple of other links to similar stories:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7277932/
http://travel.howstuffworks.com/flying-car2.htm
One thing that is very positive is the FAA’s recent (2006) certification of smaller and smaller jets and microjets (VLJs, etc.) that will undoubtedly lead to the certification of the flying car class soon.
This quote from Woody Norris sums up the futuring and innovation of the flying car (and really any of our predictions that are going to emerge in the next few decades)…
"This stuff that we're surrounded by, that we think is so cool is caveman," says Norris. "The good stuff is coming. The really good stuff is coming."
I agree with Prof Hinkle as some technologies are dependent on a variety of factors, including technological capability, timing and acceptance.
Have fun! *waves*
Cynthia Calongne
a.k.a. Lyr Lobo in Second Life
Post a Comment