This is an earlier experiment. Read the amendments below before treating its findings as current.
The question
That planner also enlarged sideways dodges, so the cause was mixed. And maybe the 10 m box is just too short.
What was tested
Six layouts each: drop the vertical dodge without enlarging the sideways one; give the box hard walls 24, 40 or 80 m tall; move the busy sky's two crossing lanes 40 m apart instead of 20.
What was found then
Dropping the vertical dodge was worse still (slow-responding craft 80 to 136 collisions per 1000 km), so the vertical move matters. For ideal craft (they respond instantly), taller walls came with fewer collisions, reaching 0 at 80 m, like no wall. But taller boxes also spread starting heights, so height alone is not proven. Wider spacing helped the eVTOL (2.2 to 1.35), but it also moved lanes relative to hovering craft, so the effects cannot be separated.
What we learned later
With the pull back toward the lane switched off, craft spread far beyond ±12 m, so the band is where that pull balances them.
research/reviews/brief-c19.md
What changed
Nothing.
Numbers and source references
- 6
- seeds per configurationresearch/reviews/brief-c16.md
- 80 → 136
- slow craft collisions per 1000 km, redirected vs dropped vertical dodge (79.6 → 135.5)research/reviews/brief-c16.md
- 4.4 → 34
- ideal craft, same comparison (4.37 → 34.3)research/reviews/brief-c16.md
- 7.3 → 10.6
- busy airspace ×4, same comparisonresearch/reviews/brief-c16.md
- 1.51 / 0.95 / 0.07 / 0.00
- ideal craft collisions per 1000 km with a 10/24/40/80 m walled boxresearch/reviews/brief-c17.md
- 57 → 7.4 vs 3.7
- slow craft: 10 m wall 57.25, 80 m wall 7.44, no wall 3.68research/reviews/brief-c17.md
- 2.2 → 1.35
- electric airframe, lanes 20 m vs 40 m apart (2.18 → 1.35)research/reviews/brief-c17.md