Fairly Realistic Flying Car Offered for 2009 Delivery 276
An anonymous reader writes to tell us about yet another promise of a flying car. The Register is reporting on the latest from Terrafugia Inc called the "Transition" which is a combination car and airplane that runs on unleaded gas. The idea is that it's a car that you can drive to the nearest airstrip and, with the touch of a button, convert to an airplane, fly to an airstrip close to your goal, then convert back to a car to reach your ultimate destination. Of course, how many times have we been promised flying cars only to suffer in perpetual disappointment.
I'll Believe That... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Everyone is a criminal, everything is a weapon. (Score:3, Funny)
It's a datsun (Score:5, Funny)
Cmdr. Sisko wants to know -- (Score:3, Funny)
It's the year 2000.
Where are the flying cars?!
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Cmdr. Sisko wants to know -- (Score:5, Interesting)
Only thing is that he had no transport other than his (own personal) airplane. So he wanders out to the ramp, jumps in, and taxi's his aircraft past the main gate onto the road and to the gas station just outside the Base..
Of course this was back in the day when 'it wasn't so bad to drink and drive', and i'm sure he did a bit of a 'rug dance' in front of his CO on Monday morning... but went onto a rather successful career.
Re:Cmdr. Sisko wants to know -- (Score:4, Informative)
So flying cars, no. Driving airplanes... yes.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Cmdr. Sisko wants to know -- (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
don't believe me? here's the story [seclists.org]
Re:Cmdr. Sisko wants to know -- (Score:5, Interesting)
My parents live in a little village in Scotland called Lochcarron. A few years ago, there was a flourishing salmon farming industry (now collapsed, alas). There were hatcheries in the lochs in the mountains, and fully fledged farms in the sea lochs.
When the hatchlings in the mountain lochs got large enough, they got ferried down to the sea lochs. This happened by helicopter, presumably for speed. So, at the appropriate time of year, they'd hire in a helicopter and pilot who would spend a week or so flying around moving the young salmon.
Where did the pilot live while doing this? In the Lochcarron Hotel, of course. Where did they leave the helicopter? In the hotel car park, of course.
In a parking bay.
The helicopter was small enough that it would park very neatly in a double bay. It would always be parked in the one in the corner, and the helicopter landing skids would always be exactly 20cm from the curb in both directions. There'd usually be some cars lined up next to it, too, with the rotors hanging over them. It would leave in the morning, and come back in the afternoon. I don't know where it got refueled --- I doubt you can get Jet A1 from the local garage.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
The rest of your screed is also nonsensical. Energy-to-weight ratios and the lack of star trek physics pretty much dictates that if flying cars are in the near future, they'll be "petrol" powered and rare. Or at least hydrocarbon powered, re
Re: (Score:2)
Just look at VHS tapes, we were on this while the rest of the world was on laserdisc. By the time we got DVD, the tycoon$ are saying lets make more money and sell them more HD-DVD/blueray/more of the same.
Masks! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Masks! (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
So where's Caractatus Potts... (Score:3, Insightful)
And they never DID develp Flubber. (Score:2)
And violating conservation of energy (or puling the extra energy from somewhere unexplained) helps a lot with fuel costs.
Phew (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Phew (Score:5, Funny)
50s? Ha./ (Score:2, Informative)
More like the 30s!
This will go nowhere. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:This will go nowhere. (Score:5, Insightful)
What's worse, you'd probably see some idiot "driver" flying 300 miles with his right turn signal on.
Re: (Score:2)
I could see this idea take off (pun intended), but it would require a massive computerized infrastructure signaling take-offs and landings. Your local suburb could have a central strip and every aspect would have to be automated to make it efficient.
The only other thing that I could see as semi-viable would be small, zeppelins that a
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This will go nowhere. (Score:4, Funny)
That'd be like so embarrassing. Stuck three thousand feet in the air, waiting around until dad gets there with a gas can.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, scary enough is the fact that they've not set the bar very high ...
Re: (Score:2)
For a plane, thats a joke.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Realistic? (Score:4, Informative)
550lb total payload. -120lb gas, -200lb pilot + 150lb passenger = 80lb left. What...you were eplanning on bringing a little luggage?
Re: (Score:2)
The whole blind-spot thing can be overcome with inexpensive cameras (people already do this on SUVs and trucks), though. As for passengers and cargo, as a personal conveyance device 80lbs really isn't bad. You're not going to go pick up fertilizer or concrete at the Home Depot in this thing. 80lbs of cargo is more than most people take on a week vacation, and if you're that worried about bringing back souvenirs there's always UPS.
Re: (Score:2)
Bring 2 backpacks of 20lb each (camera equip, lunch, and a couple changes of clothes), and now you're flirting dangerously close to the absolute limit. Don't run into any bad weather.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Realistic? (Score:5, Funny)
Dude, that is sooo 1999. We now call it iPlanning
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The way I see it, a hybrid car/plane would likely be aro
Re: (Score:2)
Most of the time is spent getting to and from the airport (tram + airport express, bus + picked up by my parents back home), waiting in line through safety control, waiting to board, waiting to get off, getting my luggage and so on and so forth. Actual flight time is 50 mins, in practise it takes me at least three hours door to door. I could drive but we're talking 6-7 hours, which is quite long plus you have to actually drive. If I could throw my luggage in t
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but I try not to.
A 'flying car' is not a car, but rather an airplane that happens to be (marginally) able to be driven on the public roads. For flight, it would require lots of the same stuff as a standard light aircraft. You can't just take an eye test, get your license, hop in and buzz around the block.
Of course, it depends on how many kazillion such a thing would cost,
Lots and lots.
operating cost
Lots and lots. Certified aircraft require licensed me
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm with you. This doesn't seem that viable as an automobile, nor all that great as an airplane, though I guess it would be better than paying hangar fees if you already fly a small airplane....
As for a flying car, the whole "air strip" thing ruins it for me. An ultralight homebrew helicopter can take off anywhere and can be driven without a pilot's license. If your main goal is to have a flying vehicle to replace your car for typical trips, that would be a much better choice. Besides, small aircraft
Wikipedia link (Score:2)
This won't ever become mainstream (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that software. I'll admit their requirements on avionics are top notch, but I'm not sure I want the clusterfuck that's been pretty much every replacement for the aging air traffic control system in charge of hurtling me to my destination.
Similar to the AeroCar (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
So probably another 50-100 year wait.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Consistency please? (Score:3, Funny)
Don't expect consistency. (Score:2)
Thinking of "submitters" as a homogeneous mass of nearly-identical units is the kind of category/magical thinking characteristic of the old-line media. That's one of the reasons they're dying off as the internet rises.
Here on the internet the population really is diverse.
Heck: The same individual is often "diverse" from hour to hour. B-)
Most important thing to know (Score:2, Funny)
Look out below!
Unleaded fuel???? (Score:2)
Especially since aircraft tend to run on a higher grade of fuel because they need all of the energy they can muster to actually achieve flight.
I'm gonna need to see a working prototype before I think anyone has achieved VTOL on unleaded fuel and in a package which can both safely fly and drive. To date, the military with very big budgets hasn't always been able to make VTOL work.
Until then, this is just an "artists rendition" of so
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This one has wings that fold out and takes off and lands conventionally - hence the bit about finding a runway...
Re: (Score:2)
"The Transition isn't a PAV; it's a normal light aircraft which can fold its wings at the touch of a button and become a car, and which runs on unleaded.
Re: (Score:2)
You sir, are exactly correct. When I read the first paragraph of TFA, I saw ...
and misinterpreted the nature of the beast.
You are absolutely correct, there is nothing VTOL about this machine at all. My bad. =)
Cheers
Re: (Score:2)
Those guys at the Register are pretty good at letting you think you're reading one thing while it actually says something different....
I always read their articles with a 'what are they really saying', and usually read someone else's article on the same topic to see how much FUD/exaggeration they crammed in there...
I still agree with your premise that their pushing sh*t up hill with a very small stick....
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it wasn't my original premise
Cheers
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
A lot of the newer, smaller engines, like Rotaxes and Jabirus, can run on automotive unleaded gas (often 93 octane). The older engines often can too, though you have to be careful as ethanol can eat up seals in the fuel system and give you a very bad day. This is getting more popular as gas prices rise
We're also starting to see a
common mod (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Um, its a folding-wing light propellor driven aircraft with a road drivetrain to allow you to drive to a runway from your home on regular roads, convert to an aircraft, and take-off and fly to your destination runway, land, fold wings, and drive on the road to your final destination. Its not VTOL. Its not a jet. Its not time machine. Its not lots of things,
It's more complicated than that... (Score:2)
The real problems, as I see it, will be intergrating two disparate systems and organizing two fundamentally different control sets (flying and driving) from a single cockpit.
A few people have also commented on the 550 lb payload, that's actually fairly reasonable for a light plane.
alternately (Score:3, Interesting)
Pros and Cons: (Score:2)
Also, the carrying capacity is very limited with a capacity of 2 people or 1 person with luggage. 2 people with luggage is a much more acceptable figure.
The autonomy is less than 500 miles in the air, not so great for interstate trips.
The air mileage mileage, however is 25 mpg. That's good mileage.
And it has a 120 gallons fuel capacity, not bad at all for a car.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends where you live - if you're in the western U.S., Canada or Australia, it's not so great. In the eastern U.S. or Europe it's fine. 500 miles range can get me from NYC to Boston or DC easily, bypassing heavily-trafficked roadways.
Eh, it's OK. Per passenger-mile a 747 is better. :)
Not bad
Security Checks? (Score:5, Funny)
Meanwhile, in other news ... (Score:2, Offtopic)
(here) [slashdot.org].
What are the odds...? (Score:5, Funny)
The chase... (Score:2, Funny)
nada (Score:5, Insightful)
The construction of a plane is nowhere nearly hardy enough for typical road use. If you end up hitting just a bit of potholes, speedbumps, etc, are you ready to that vehicle in the air? Hell, cars these days are build with crash bumpers that are supposed to take a 5mph bump without driveability-affecting damage - no planes have them. The undercarriage of a car includes some of the world's most advanced engineering tuned for stability, handling, suspension and road noise - which adds significant weight. A plane has a few wheels (one that turns) and struts, nothing so complicated - because its light and just durable enough for landing on the runway. TFA mentions drivetrain and wing storage as two other clashing designs, but there are several more (road worthiness, air worthiness, strength, durability, luxury, maintenance).
It comes down to tuning for the target environment. A car is not a boat. A plane is not a car. Shoes are not wheels. Targeting two has predictable results: Everyone is let down.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That is not a problem. The car part will be.
Don't they require airbags and a certain amount of survivablity in different crash situations now? Really doubt you can get all that under 1400 lbs. That is like half of a Mini Cooper isn't it ?!? My 1800 lb Opel has no airbags and would fail any kind of side impact standard, adding wings and a prop while shaving 400lbs seems pretty tough.
Oh and a fe
Re: (Score:2)
Yes they can take a good hit, but with a serious lack of car-level comfort. The ride on the ground in a light aircraft is endurable for the few minutes it takes to get off the ground. That same ride quality in a car trip of any length would be unacceptable.
Ah, yes, terrafugia (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Not particularly clever, but hey, they don't seem to mind the name...
You'd do what for a flying car?!? (Score:2, Funny)
The Weight Problem (Score:3, Insightful)
To be a capable and licenseable road vehicle, it needs to have things like Lights, Bumpers, Side-Impact protection. Not to mention meet pollution regulations. And um, pneumatic tires, wheels, a transmission, and capable brakes. Those all add a heck of a lot of weight. At least 500 pounds that an airplane does not need. So it's going to be a mighty lousy airplane. Carrying a useless 500 pounds at air-freight costs is not an economical way to fly.
Then there are the FAA regulations, which are very strict, and hardly in conformance with the road regulations. Many very basic regulations about configuration are very hard to reconcile with the needs of an auto. The alternative is to license it as an experimental aircraft, which gives you some freedoms, but closes a lot of windows too-- making the plane difficult to insure, finance, and restricts its uses.
When My Engine Stops (Score:2)
However, when my airplane stops for similar reasons, it stops. It stops and it falls out of the sky, accelerating towards the Earth. I very likely die.
I guess what I'm saying is if Ford starts making these, I won't be shopping those lots.
Realistic? (Score:3, Informative)
Screw the flying car! (Score:2)
http://www.backtothefuture88.com/movies-TV/bttf3_pic6_train.jpg [backtothefuture88.com]
qz
NO LANDING (Score:2)
Instead of "No Parking" signs everywhere, you'll see "NO LANDING" everywhere, including on the top of every building!!
Where will the aliens park?
Buildable, yes. Marketable, no. (Score:3, Informative)
There's no fundamental reason this thing can be built. It's a light sport aircraft with folding wings and good taxi capability. The wings just fold, which looks stupid in car mode but can be done without much trouble. They don't retract into the fuselage like one of the cooler-looking but unbuildable designs for flying cars. It's going to be a lousy car, though. Too fragile, and with all that sail area, hard to handle in a crosswind.
There's probably a market for some kind of ducted-fan thrust vehicle usable in tight spots. Moller is unlikely to make his "Skycar" work, after forty years of failure. But someone else might. Such a vehicle needs turbine power, will cost as much as a jet helicopter, and will be a fuel hog. The military could use something they could drop down into an urban street. With helicopters, the rotor circle is too big for that.
Interestingly, we're seeing small UAVs with those properties. Flying robots will be deployed before flying cars. The stability problem for small pure-thrust VTOL aircraft seems to have been solved.
Laughing at weather? (Score:3, Interesting)
We had a ranch in Northern Arizona and like a lot of ranches in that area, we had a private airstrip. A neighbor misinterpreted his newly minted instrument rating as permission to fly no matter what. He loaded up his family and took off near a thunderhead. The flight lasted just long enough to kill the entire family.
Weather in Arizona can get particularly nasty, even when you're paying full attention. Once, my father inadvertently flew under a thunderhead and survived by pointing the nose at the ground and pouring on full throttle. Even still, he only managed to not gain any altitude while he traversed under the cloud.
I think if these vehicles ever see the light of day, we'll see Darwin step up to the plate in a major way due to people 'laughing at the weather.'
Terraforming (Score:3, Funny)
PAL-V: Gyrocopter+tricycle = WANT! (Score:3, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Alright, so long as it doesn't climb to the top of the Empire State Building to tap power off of that big light bulb up there.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because it would be too heavy. The aircraft from TFA is just a conventional airplane with a fancy transmission and foldable wings and can't get airborne with a full tank of gas and two fat people. Add batteries an electric motor, a heavier diesel engine, ditch the wings and propellor for a less efficient rotor in a roadway-sized package and you'll end up with a flying brick. Minus the flying part.
Overall, the qualities th
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Japanese automakers getting cute at show [yahoo.com]
Their answer: Transform the car into a friendly companion -- not just a machine for getting around.
Honda Motor Co. even says its white bubble-shaped rubbery-surfaced Puyo, equipped with a panoramic window, is supposed to be a pet. The cabin part of Puyo, a fuel-cell vehicle, rotates so it never has to go into reverse.
pic of Puyo [yahoo.com]
The body glows in various colors of lighting under the car's silicone body surface
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
But a gyroplane would be the perfect flying car -- the rotor is unpowered, so you don't need a tail rotor sticking out the back. You can use a prerotator to shorten takeoff distance (a few gyros can even take off vertically), and the landing roll is also very short. When
5 MPH crash standard. (Score:2)
My first thought on seeing that was: "What's a fender-bender going to do to your expensive folding plane when the 'fender' is a wing?"
Will these things be airworthy after a 5MPH crash? Bet they're not.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Based on what, exactly? Something particular in TFA that you can point to that is problematic with the FAA? TFA indicates that the manufacturers have been working with both the FAA and the NHTSA (the latter of which may be a bigger barrier.)