• @Daft_ish@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    109
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Her lawyers must be crazy to think they can get anything done that elon couldn’t. Taylor should be mad at her PR for not stopping her if she asked for this personally.

    As for private jets. People with wealth, use that wealth to find an alternative. God knows you haven’t found anything else to do with it.

    Edit: Also, please let it be zeppelin technology.

    • @BigPotato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      2510 months ago

      They could invest in whole new rail lines with their own private cars and fill the other cars with low cost seats. Tons of people on it and no way reasonable way of tracking them because so many people boarding it each time.

      • @grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        35
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        (Top: Taylor Swift’s private jet – or at least the same model, a Dassault Falcon 900. Bottom: JP Morgan’s private Pullman railcar.)

    • @stoly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      1010 months ago

      Dude dirigibles are STUPID EFFICIENT because they don’t have to fly. They just float so you only need some tiny little fans to move them in the direction you like. I really do wish they’d come back

      • @Bytemeister@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        Ελληνικά
        1510 months ago

        Airships; When you want to be as fast as an ocean liner, as cheap as an airplane, and as subtle as a train.

          • El Barto
            link
            fedilink
            110 months ago

            It can’t be just that.

            (I despise the “something something” meme, but that’s another story.)

            • @jj4211@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              410 months ago

              Well, that’s a big one. Hydrogen is a much more available element to pump up an airship, and with hydrogen effectively off the table, then helium which if used at scale would be a problem, and it’s already a bit of a problem as it is.

              Aside from that, it forever shaped public perception, so airships have an uphill battle.

              But it’s still a thing, the butt-looking Airlander wants to bring back the airship. Their ‘10’ model however has half the cargo payload of a 737. Their more hypothetical ‘50’ would compete with an A300 on Cargo, which is respectable. However the top speed is 85mph, so 6 times slower than a typical cargo aircraft. However it may be able to tout versatility closer to a tractor trailer, they do still need a landing area, but not so much a runway. Tractor trailers are often used for long haul despite not being able to go 85mph, and definitely not ‘as the crow flies’.

            • lad
              link
              fedilink
              3
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              Afaik, mostly for not being too efficient in a suboptimal environment. Also for having a limit on minimal size, but there has been an article somewhere, I’ll update if I find it

              Edit: haven’t found the article, but what I found is this. They fly relatively low (under 2 km), have a hard time going against wind, old ones also had trouble landing. Also contemporary ones are more of a hybrid of dirigible, plane, and helicopter, that probably makes them expensive, too. Existing airship infrastructure is also not suitable for them

              Edit2: oh, and some claim that dirigibles don’t work for commerce because commerce is too conservative, but it’s not too likely because there were news of dirigibles almost taking over the cargo transportation since like 1960s and it didn’t yet, so likely there are things to be solved