h a l f b a k e r yOn the one hand, true. On the other hand, bollocks.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Most major cities suffer from traffic congestion, particularly during peak hours. This can cause a long wait for a traditional taxicab, and a frustratingly slow journey once it arrives.
I propose a network of powered paraglider taxis. A powered paraglider is, in essence, a parachute with a motor.
It is started on foot, travels through the air and can achieve an average speed of around thirty miles per hour. Although most such vehicles carry a single occupier, the technology already exists for a seasoned pilot to carry an untrained passenger.
Requiring only a short run in order to become airborne, this technology is ideal for the time-poor businessperson who needs to be somewhere quickly. The taxi-glider can be launched from a car park (parking lot), a quiet side-street or even the flat roof of a sky-scraper.
Need to get to a meeting quickly? Booked a last-minute flight, and worried about the traffic on the way to the airport? The sky is no longer the limit!
(Air-space restrictions may apply; the proponent of this idea takes no responsibility for injury or death caused by pre-emptive military action.)
[link]
|
| |
interesting idea. it would certainly work for a little
while, but it would be difficult to sustain if it grew
very much. if there were as many taxi-gliders as
taxis, there could be traffic problems. and limited
cargo space, though I suppose that's not always an
issue and could help limit business so that we don't
have too much traffic. |
|
| |
This would cause more car accidents and thus more gridlock, from drivers looking upward at the paragliders instead of where they're going... |
|
| |
Wow - four years for an anno! |
|
| |
Impractical and therefore [+]. |
|
| |
I'm not entirely sure I'd want to take off from a skyscraper -
take-offs are generally safer than landings because they
begin closer to the ground. On the other hand, I wouldn't
want to take off in the turbulent wind-funnels between
skyscrapers on the ground. |
|
| |