A Czech firm thinks it's finally solved one of the tech world's most desirable objects, the flying car, and says the first consumer vehicles will be ready to lift off by 2017, government regulations permitting. Youtube Video Speaking at the South by Southwest conference in Austin, Texas, the AeroMobil company founder Juraj …
Flying Cars are the poster child of lies and broken schedules.
In a related point, I've just ordered up a cartridge of Flying Car Paste for my 3D printer. Yep, and I went for the fusion-powered option. I can't wait until it arrives so I'll be able to 3D print my new, complete, ready to fly, fusion-powered flying car. It'll even 3D print the tires already inflated to 35 PSI, and the engine already warmed up. Because as you know, you can 3D print ANYTHING...
"Every flying car venture seems to come to the same end - crashing into government regulations."
And this is why smart investors stay away; there is absolutely no way that flying can ever be de-regulated to the level that some of these companies expect, so their market projections are just pie-(not)-in-the-sky.
no you want this
Yes. Yes I do. Normally I have no interest in quadbikes / ATVs or jetskis, but that amphibious Gibbs number is actually useful. It would go very nicely with my island vacation home, as soon as I get one of those.1
Is that the same one Clarkson drove in Top Gear, when he raced against Hamster in the Alfa?
1Actually, here in Michigan, island vacation cabins can be had for very reasonable prices. Though it probably makes more sense to rent one.
The restriction most likely to make them fail is the [sudden] introduction of the need for a CPL + 500hours flying time before you are allowed to buy one.
That would stop most of the idiots but not all.
Those who 'pimp' their Fiesta's will still find a way to get airborne. Just a fact of life.
Second thought, make it easy for them to get flying. They'll soon become extinct.#
"Second thought, make it easy for them to get flying. They'll soon become extinct."
Exactly! What are we waiting for? I have a similar idea concerning would be jihadis trying to get to Syria, for whom I propose a mandatory sentence of transportation to Syria.
The only remaining problem is how to get politicians recruited to either scheme.
I don't believe that draggy airframe will cruise at 125MPH with that pusher prop, more likely 125 is the Vne.
Also, 81 MPH is a high rotate speed for this class of aircraft, so it is going to need some big fields.
I suppose it gives the trip option though, to return if the weather changes. Convention flight only light aircraft are easily grounded by bad weather for most private pilots. Which is a real pain if you hop over to Le Touquet on a Sunday morning, to find in the afternoon unforecast low cloud and rain is in the channel. You are left with a few choices: 1. get accommodation and wait for the weather to clear (could be days and your passengers need to get home); 2. leave the aircraft where it is and return by ferry/tunnel/train; 3. Lie to French ATC about your instrument rating and risk the trip back illegally and uninsured with danger of death.
None of them are very convenient options.
So folding back the wings and driving on to a ferry would work nicely as a cure for get-home-itis.
"Also, 81 MPH is a high rotate speed for this class of aircraft, so it is going to need some big fields."
Are you assuming only the airscrew is used to get up to speed? Maybe you just shift up to 7th gear to spin the prop once you drive up to speed?
Personally, I dunno, don't care. CBA to look for the details. Just sayin'
I did wonder if the solution to a lot of the flying car problems would be to use high performance electric drives rather than dead dinosaur juice aka petrochemicals.
Sure have a small petrol engine as backup but only to recharge the battery and enough failsafes to make it idiot proof such as the ability to avoid storms etc.
Some sort of comms mode would also be essential and using infrared backup so if the radio conked out then at least drivers could page each other "Turn 60 degrees north" etc.
Or I get a pilot's license, buy a light plane or helicopter and then arrange for a driverless car (only 2 years away...) or a taxi (available now) or a hire car to meet me at the local small (existing) runway near to my destination.
The carplane is inherently a compromise, not least cost. It will be a rubbish plane and a really, really, rubbish car. If driverless cars become reality they will be much safer than an ordinary car making the idea of these even more ridiculous. If I can afford a car plane, I can afford a car and a plane.
The only advantage it seems to have is that I don't have to pay storage fees at the local airport, a cost saving I'm sure would be wiped out by increased servicing costs. If you own a carplane you are definitely going to own (at least one) car as well.
If there was a demand for these things all the local runways would offer onsite hire cars - anyone know if they do?
Most grass field airports have at least 2000 by 75 feet of firm sod and a little extra because of the special technique required (soft field) because sod is relatively sticky. Most soft field airports in US don't offer onsite hire cars; they are available at a few thousand hard field airports in the US, but they often have to come out and pick you up. If you are a rock star then the uber limo will know where to pick you up.
> If there was a demand for these things all the local runways would offer onsite hire cars - anyone know if they do?
Of course they do, given that there is sufficient traffic to sustain the hire car business (for which you usually need a mix of GA and CAT, mind). In the US it is (or used to be) common for FBOs to *loan* you a car for the duration of your stay. In Europe, it is customary for locals (or anyone else with a car) to offer a ride to visiting pilots, and at many places there will be bicycles to borrow or hire.
Helps to know the subject a bit if you're going to make any assertions, as opposed to simply asking a question.
Finally! I can have my flying car.
After all the decades of waiting, I can finally have and own an object that, at the push of a button, can change itself from the second most energy intensive means of conveyance, to the most energy intensive means of conveyance. How could you not like that, all you naysayers?
As an earthbound car the AeroMobil isn't impressive as its maximum speed of around 99 miles an hour and range of around 545 miles won't excite.
That's faster than I ever need to go, and further than I want to go without a pit stop. What's the problem? If they'd just get rid of the wings and prop and whole "airplane" thing, they might be able to cook up a perfectly decent car.
What I'm waiting to see is a video of one of these landing in a crosswind greater than 10 kts and at least 20 degrees off straight down the runway. I expect it will be interesting, exciting, and the aftermath will be ugly! Hence, the famous last words in the title.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019