Crap Crap and Crap on top
@Mark "200mph minimum?"
Crap (how many glider air frames have you seen that could survive at this speed? 0)
"You'll need ILS or similar to get them to land the same direction."
Crap. What about landing them 1 way on one side and another on the other side. Colour coded, with lights. Kinda like we have on roads. Also at lower speeds SIGHT is usually a good indicator if someone is approaching the wrong way, mandatory GPS system could help to mark other air users too, or a centralised RADAR station that feeds data to all in range. NO technological obstacles.
"A stationary electric car uses whatever number of watts you're expending on the radio, AC and lights. So the stationary traffic is a load of bollocks too."
True, but CRAP argument. When MOVING which is their job they do not have the efficiency when penciling in the energy cost to build the roads into remote locations, not drive as the crow flies etc as mentioned in the article.
"Think of an automated taxi."
Crap. How do you get it to pull over when you need to pee. where are they parked, how do they get to you in the first place, or do they travel until hailed? not very efficient in that case. Stil no crow flying direct travel.
"They can daisychain on motorways........"
Crap. And how do they respond to little Timmy running in front of the PRICT's. It stops them ALL, or mows him down with no regard. IF they cannot due to the laws of physics stop do they try anyway to limit the damage done? Technology has no answer yet.
"Move the jobs nearer the people (ie. get your companies out of the cities) which would help reduce emissions AND costs for most companies. Not only that but us workers would not have to waste 3 hours every day travelling in and out of a stinking, noisy, overcrowded city."
GRAND FINALE CRAP. Nearer the PEOPLE, OUT of the CITIES????? Heres is a clue, though I am sure you will just stick it up your arse. PEOPLE LIVE IN CITIES YOU FUCKWAD. I am glad you spend 3 hours a day driving to work, it keeps you away from SANE PEOPLE.