Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Aviation Technology
How driverless cars could kill airlines. >

How driverless cars could kill airlines.

Notices
Aviation Technology New, advanced, and future aviation technology discussion

How driverless cars could kill airlines.

Old 07-30-2019, 04:23 AM
  #1  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 128
Default How driverless cars could kill airlines.

Food for thought...

I personally drive (or fly GA) any trip below 1000 SM.
I'd stretch that mark much further in a driverless car.
If GA is available I push it to 1500 SM

How driverless cars could kill the airline industry:
https://www.fastcompany.com/90364437...rline-industry

People hate flying, and it could lead to the demise of the airline industry
New research shows that people see driverless cars as an attractive alternative to flying. Could AVs kill the airlines?
[Source Images: OstapenkoOlena]

By stephen rice and scott winter3 minute Read

As driverless cars become more capable and more common, they will change people’s travel habits not only around their own communities but across much larger distances. Our research has revealed just how much people’s travel preferences could shift, and found a new potential challenge to the airline industry.

Imagine someone who lives in Atlanta and needs to travel to Washington, D.C., for business. This is about a 10-hour drive. A flight takes about two hours, assuming no delays. Add to that the drive to the airport, checking in, the security line, and waiting at the gate. Upon arrival in D.C., it may take another 30 minutes to pick up any checked bags and find a rental car—and even more time to drive to the specific destination. The average person would estimate a total travel time of four to five fours. Most people would choose to fly instead of driving themselves.

However, if they could have a fully driverless car take them there, the choice changes. Passengers could eat, drink, work, and sleep during the 10-hour drive. They could leave whenever they want, and pack whatever they want—including liquids and pocketknives—with no searches or scans. When they get to D.C., they wouldn’t have to find a rental car and navigate to the actual place they’re going.

Which would you choose? Now imagine the self-driving car has a reclining seat with actual legroom, or even a bed. It’s more than a little tempting.
What do consumers say?

As experts in public opinion research, we know that the American public loves how quickly flights can cover large distances, but hates the security checks, long lines, delays, risk of losing baggage, and overall hassle of the flying experience.

We also know that at the moment, most people are reluctant to ride in driverless vehicles—including school buses and even ambulances that could speed their treatment in an emergency. However, our data also shows that as people learn about the benefits of driverless cars, they become more accepting of the new technology. Over time, people will feel comfortable using autonomous cars (and ambulances), just like they adjusted to riding in the first automobiles.

A future with driverless cars means people will have more options to avoid driving on their own, beyond trains and buses.

In our study, we showed people trips of different lengths and asked them to choose whether they would rather drive themselves, take a flight, or ride in a self-driving car. In general, the data indicated that people always preferred driverless vehicles over manual driving. Taking a driverless car got even more attractive if people were told that after flying, they would need a rental car in their destination city.

On short trips, with a five-hour drive, two-thirds of people would rather drive themselves. That didn’t change much when they were offered a self-driving car, unless they were told they would need a car in their destination city. Then nearly three-quarters of people preferred a self-driving car to flying.

As trips got longer, people were increasingly likely to prefer flying, but self-driving cars were still a compelling option. On the longest trips we asked about, with a 45-hour drive, only about one in 10 people preferred driving themselves—but that changed to one in six when the option was to have a car drive itself.

In follow-up work, we’re looking at how the costs of each transportation method might affect consumers’ choices—including whether they’re traveling alone or in a group with friends or family members.
How will this affect the airlines?

Losing even one in 10 customers would substantially reduce airlines’ revenue. They don’t make much money on each flight as it is; less income would likely cause them to shrink their service, flying fewer routes less frequently.

The problem wouldn’t just be customers who chose not to fly. Some passengers might split trips between self-driving cars and airplanes, which would further reduce airlines’ revenue. For instance, a person in Savannah, Georgia, who wants to go to London could choose to change planes in Atlanta—or take a self-driving car to the Atlanta airport, and skip the layover.

These changes could substantially change the aviation industry, with airlines ordering fewer airplanes from manufacturers, airports seeing fewer daily flights and lower revenue from parking lots, and even airport hotels hosting fewer guests. The future of driverless cars is appealing to consumers—which means the future of commercial flight is in danger.

This post originally appeared on The Conversation. Stephen Rice is a professor of human factors at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. Scott Winter is an assistant professor of graduate studies at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University.
takingmessages is offline  
Old 07-30-2019, 06:20 AM
  #2  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: May 2019
Posts: 89
Default

I recently realized this also when I had to stop for the night on a 14 hour drive.
If driverless does happen the benefit of driving to have your own transportation at the destination will cease to be a benefit because we wont own a car anymore anyway. No more car lots, no more oil changes no more insurance. Might have to get a new form of ID.
As Briefed is offline  
Old 07-30-2019, 06:36 AM
  #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Posts: 156
Default

We already have driverless cars to take you across the country. They are called buses and trains. Most people, unless on a vacation or retired, don’t have the time to spend 1-3 days traveling in each direction.
propilot is offline  
Old 07-30-2019, 06:53 AM
  #4  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 128
Default

Originally Posted by propilot View Post
We already have driverless cars to take you across the country. They are called buses and trains. Most people, unless on a vacation or retired, don’t have the time to spend 1-3 days traveling in each direction.
"buses and trains" neither go on your own schedule nor will be available to you for commuting around your destination. If you own a driverless car, you have the car to drive you there overnight while you sleep on it. In my case, I live in a city with very few direct routes to anywhere, which means that I have to do connecting flights to just about everywhere, and if I am going to the boondocks, then it is 2 connecting flights, so:
1 hour driving to the airport, 1.5 hours wait to depart, 2 hours flying somewhere I don't care, 1 hour waiting for a connection, another 2 hours flying somewhere else, another hour connecting, another hour to my final destination, half an hour to get out of the airport to a rental car...
That's assuming that flights weren't cancelled, or baggage lost, etc.

That's a best case scenario of 9 hours traveling!
I can drive 1300 miles in 19 hours (I've done it multiple times), that's 650 in 9.5.
Add a couple of hours more and I am a thousand miles away (give or take) and in my own car. In my own schedule. And if I can do it sleeping...
takingmessages is offline  
Old 07-30-2019, 07:17 AM
  #5  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jan 2019
Posts: 271
Default

worry about this crap when driverless cars actually show up. When I say driverless I am talking about ones where you, the "driver", can sleep while the car drives you. It is going to be awhile. maybe NEVER
AAfng is offline  
Old 07-30-2019, 07:29 AM
  #6  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 128
Default

Originally Posted by AAfng View Post
worry about this crap when driverless cars actually show up. When I say driverless I am talking about ones where you, the "driver", can sleep while the car drives you. It is going to be awhile. maybe NEVER

Not worried a bit here, I know that this is at best far, far away...
Hence the 'Food for thought...' part!
takingmessages is offline  
Old 07-30-2019, 08:22 AM
  #7  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,101
Default

I read an analysis on this, and the conclusion was that driverless cars would be bad for regional airlines but would not really impact majors much.

At some point the drive is too long, especially if it involves stopping at a hotel (not everyone sleeps well in cars).

Also need to account for ground speed... it's going to 55-65 mph, not 85 mph since automated cars will actually obey the speed limit.

But again automated vehicle technology is nowhere ready, and they don't even know how to get the AI to that point.

Without the human driver (ie liability buffer / installed scapegoat) the AI has to be very near perfect before any corporation will hang it out there liability wise. And it will be all the corporations at fist, no insurance company will write paper on something for which they have no empirical data.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 08-01-2019, 05:37 AM
  #8  
Gets Weekends Off
 
sourdough44's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Position: Left
Posts: 636
Default

Driverless cars, flying cars, pilotless airplanes? They could all happen some year.

I’m not worried anytime soon. So much would present itself in the ‘unintended consequences’ area, no worries here.
sourdough44 is offline  
Old 08-06-2019, 07:25 PM
  #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2016
Posts: 142
Default

There should already be a bullet train that runs from New York to Los Angeles. We are 20 years behind everyone else in the train department.
NatGeo is offline  
Old 08-06-2019, 07:54 PM
  #10  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,101
Default

Originally Posted by NatGeo View Post
There should already be a bullet train that runs from New York to Los Angeles. We are 20 years behind everyone else in the train department.
Did you notice what just happened in CA? How are you going to lay the tracks?

The commies and socialists just send the secret police to evict you from your home when they lay the rail lines.

But in the US, you have to battle decades of lawsuits to do imminent domain for one guy's house. How many houses and farms would need to be seized over 2200 miles? especially in the eastern US?

And then there's the environmentalists. You'd think trains are good for the environment but those people are literally bat-poop crazy... they'd sue to save the snowy spotted slugs or whatever. There will be a different species to save about every mile or so

Maybe after the next nuclear war.
rickair7777 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
OutsourceNoMo
American
52
09-24-2023 10:35 AM
bgmann
Regional
31
11-19-2011 07:33 PM
Flatspin
Regional
43
02-16-2009 07:45 PM
PeanutButter
Major
0
04-16-2007 05:11 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices