The drones taxi companies are really thinking about short trips that avoid congestion, like crossing a river.
How does it help people if they take a drone across a river and leave their car behind? Sure, there will be isolated places where your destination is just on the other side, but those will be few and far between. And with the cost of drones and their low capacity, it will still be very expensive to use them.
We will definitely have drone taxis. They will be for the very rich, as helicopters are now. Maybe a little bit cheaper, but not much.
But in order to make business sense, the manufacturer will need to sell sufficient units, and the operators will need to operate high number of flights. Given the small number of people a UAM/drone can transport at any given time, I got to think we'll end up with a very congested space even if it's just a short hop.
Yep. You either have a very low-volume business model, which is expensive because there are so few customers, or you have a high-volume model, which means air-space congestion. Passenger drones are merely an evolution of the helicopter, maybe a little less expensive, but not by much. Congestion is dealt with today by the fact that helicopters have trained, licensed pilots and are directed by Air Traffic Control, the same as fixed-wing aircraft. And by the fact that they are too expensive for ordinary people to own or use them.
The same will apply to drones: Congestion will be limited by the fact that very few people will be able to afford to own or use them, and they'll have to obey Air Traffic Control, which will mean they'll have to have a trained, licensed pilot or an automated system capable of following commands from Air Traffic Control. Such an automated system does not yet exist, though it might be possible in the future.
Another thought about drones: A plane that loses power can glide and try to find a place to land. A helicopter that loses power can auto-rotate and try to find a place to land. A drone that loses power falls like a rock.
