/tech/ - Technology★

Doubtful, too much cost and too much risk. People would weaponize them and try to find ways to get them to fall out of the sky. Personally id salvage them for parts and steal whatever I can and maybe make my own flamethrower drones

We will. There will be a doordash or postmates within a year or two that uses a hundred drones per city.

But i belive that eliminating the human factor is not the solution.

>>1024521 (OP)

>>1024573

>100 drones per city

So here's the problem: a delivery truck can deliver hundreds of packages a day. Sure, in an urban environment the delivery truck will take longer to get there than the drone, however, it is far more efficient. Whereas the drone charges, leaves the DC, delivers to the address, and then returns to the DC to spend 30-120 minutes charging, the delivery truck can make trip after trip, delivering package after package, on a single tank of gas. Furthermore, let's say 100 drones were making deliveries all day, which took on average ten minutes to get to from the DC. They then took 30 minutes to charge. That's 50 minutes a package. Let's say another ten minutes for loading-time. That's an hour. That means one drone could deliver _only_ 24 packages in a day. Now, who wants to get a package at 2am? No one! Most urban UPS drivers deliver between 9 and 4. Let's say the drones can that's only 7 packages a drone could do. All 100 of your drones would be delivering one trucks-worth of deliveries in a day.

UPS has 119k delivery "vehicles", which is everything from the big trucks to motorcycles, globally. They also only have 1,800 DCs. Yet, they're able to deliver 20 million packages and documents a day. That's an average of 168+ packages per vehicle, per day. It just doesn't make sense to use drones.

The logistics of using drones are ridiculous. Not only do you have the time and lack of volume-per-drone, but you have a major infrastructure problem. Given their limited distance, you'd have to have a DC in every single city that gets drone deliveries. That means every DC would have to have whatever the consumer is ordering. Because, if it has to get shipped from another DC, then the whole purpose of having a drone delivery is mute. Furthermore, given their limited range (remember they have to get there under load, and then return), many geographically larger cities, like LA for instance, would have to have several DCs, all with what the consumer is going to order. Think of the cost! Not to mention, to actually be effective, every DC would have to have hundreds of drones.

>>1024531

> People would weaponize them and try to find ways to get them to fall out of the sky.

Highway robbery will make a comeback, except this time it will be drones robbing other drones.

literally the only thing that prevents this from happening is niggers.

Even if drones did magically become more efficient than what we have at the moment, the dominant problem would still remain - absolutely retarded routing algorithms. Ask any delivery truck driver in any country and you'll get horror stories of how inefficient their paths for the day are. Especially if it's some multinational shithole like Amazon.

>>1024659

I imagine you posted this because they'd bat the fuck out of drones for sport but it's also true because Amazon's delivery contractors have been hiring near-minimum wage deliverymen who provide their own vehicles. I'd wager the cost on Amazon's end is something like three bucks a package, if that.

>>1024587

>all this autism over a number pulled out of the ass

Also simply buying more drones to make up for downtime is a non-issue.

>>1024665

Robots don't care if their route was efficient, only that they had followed it properly.

>>1024521 (OP)

If I see these in real life I'm heading down to sports basement to get myself a pellet gun.

>>1024672

People like that fall into two categories: LARPers and felons. Former never do it, latter do it a few times and go to prison for several years, then also never do it.

>>1024674

>Wanting big brother to have flying surveillance devices flying over his house a few dozen times a day.

>Calling people felons

Shalom, yes we certainly will. We will all be using them in future.

>>1024672

>>1024678

You will be sued by my lawyers before you can even fire your gun.

>>1024603

all you would need are 2 drones and a net + gps jammer. Idk if cellular jamming would be feasible however.

>>1024693

I'm retarded, just need a faraday net with a drawstring that can be pulled shut with a motor

>>1024521 (OP)

As long as there are niggers and spics i don't see how.

>>1024587

Drones could be used to replace not the truck but the delivery guy. Instead of the truck moving to A, stopping, guy delivering, moving to B (which is nearby) it could move to A, deploy a drone, keep moving to B without stopping, deploy another, etc. Could be feasible for large cities where you have many deliveries close-by (so you can do them in parallel). The power part can be a killer though, it isn't like you can use fuel since then the first nigger who shoots it down and catches on fire will sue you into bankruptcy.

>>1024700

Why not fly out a couple of armed security drones with the delivery drone?

>>1024698

So this is why Sergey Brin was building a secret zeppelin in an old NASA hanger?

>>1024719

Polite sage for doublepost.

Even with Amazon as powerful as it is there is no way that would currently fly. A drone is just unoccupied property so it shooting back at attackers isn't going to be protected by any sort of self-defense laws. There are several instances where people booby trapped buildings to prevent theft. In every single one the property owner ended up being criminally liable for the injury of the thief. There are also FAA rules that come into play that make flying armed difficult.

>>1024725

Drones getting shot down isn't an issue. Return on investment for drones is something like three months (if it makes just $20 of profit per day, that works out to $7200 per year), for an enterprise like Amazon they're basically free. Then, there aren't as many dumb fucking niggers as to shoot down the drones that deliver their packages, so the losses are expected to be minuscule. And third, delivery drones are FAA aircraft and taking one down is a serious felony that can easily land you in prison. After the word spreads that Jamal went to jail for plinking at Amazon drone, Tyrone would rather plink at beer bottles in his backyard.

>>1024698

They're manually flown so that would be impossible. Also weird that they depict them with such large cradle and jet engines, they'd be using turboprops and the cargo bay would fit inside the blimp. It would probably be practical for an airship like this to cruise on a path between cities, pick up packages at the warehouse and then drone-drop them as it flies past the location.

>>1024587

>Battery loading times

I know that modern hardware makes you think that it's impossible to swap batteries, but please make an effort.

>>1024680

*shoots you between the beady eyes*

SHALL

>>1024749

Battery is the most expensive part of the drone so you might as well just buy multiple drones and bypass all the problems with swapping batteries.