The number of magazine covers that have predicted that we will have flying cars in our future number in the hundreds(if not thousands), and yet I think they are all wrong(at least for the near future). The problem isn’t in the flying part of the equation, because I see that part of the equation as pretty much solved in the next ten years. The problem is safety. As it stands now, if someone runs out of gas, or has their engine die for some reason or another, or is involved in a minor accident they can pull over to the side of the road and either fix the problem or wait for help to arrive. If any of these happen in flight, however, things fall out of the sky. If death was pretty much guaranteed every time your car stalled, ran out of gas or was involved in a minor fender bender I doubt very much anyone would be allowed to drive
Now, the obvious solution is to make the flying car much more reliable than the ground car, but if this were possible they would make ground cars more reliable in the first place.
Your thoughts?
To my mind, the real safety concern is the notion of having people manually steer such things - putting a possible guided missile into private hands. That one will be solved the same way that cars will be solved - by having truly automatic controls, in which the driver simply tells the machine the destination and a computer system works out how to get there (but only allowing safe destinations), keeps the vehicles properly spaced, has automatic safety features reacting to problems much faster than a human driver, etc.
The real problem is going to be fuel costs. No way that having one’s own flying vehicle is ever going to be a fuel-efficient way to get around.
I think they already have flying cars available, right? They call them ‘planes’.
I would imagine that a flying car would have to meet all of the FAA requirements of any other aircract for maintenance and safety, as well as appropriate operator licensure.
I’d prefer a flying bicycle, you know, so I can get more exercise.
Another reason people like the idea of flying cars is because it would eliminate parking lots.
This is an excellent scheme if you don’t mind crushing the roof of your homes, business and shopping centers, then taking out a ladder and climbing down to the front door.
And I imagine FAA requirements would tighten up if hundreds of thousands(millions?) of flying cars were added to the mix.
The only way there will be a number on that scale will be if flying cars are inexplicably as affordable as a mid-size Ford sedan.
Even when whatever obstacles are overcome and the flying car becomes a reality, they’ll be operated by wealthy hobbyists and present in small enough numbers that they should be able to be regulated as just another type of aircraft.
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that a flying car should use less fuel than an old-fashioned car, at least on a long trip. When we drive our cars, most of the fuel we use is necessary because friction between the car and the ground always acts to retard the car’s motion. For the flying car, once it’s in the air, there won’t be any friction. There will be air resistance, but the air resistance for a flying car will be no higher than for a ground car, assuming it’s the same size and travels at the same speed. Lift is thus the only thing that the flying car needs energy for but the ground car doesn’t.
Would these rich people be taking off from and landing at designated airports, or will they be travelling from home to work and back? Air traffic control is a bitch already, and I can’t imagine adding this to the mix.
Air resistance is far higher than the rolling friction.
Think of how easy it is to push a stalled car. Now get on the freeway and stick your hand out the window.
Hopefully one of our aviators will check in, but I think that an aircraft operating below a certain altitude under visual flight rules isn’t required to file a flight plan with ATC.
I’m not saying there won’t be flying cars around, just that there will be few enough that I don’t see a need to appoint a Presidential commission to decide how to handle them. I think the FAA may have to come up with perhaps a special license class or some such, and a few new rules regarding speed/altitude/flight rules, but that’ll be it.
If true, would that be because of the much lower volume of flight at the lower levels…which would increase if flying cars become available.
I imagine that there would have to be a whole new set of traffic regulations developed if low level flight takes flight(so to speak) and the skies fill with people on their way to and from work..
Indeed, pretty much every vehicle that has thus far been called a flying car is actually just a drivable plane. The point of a flying car is that you never have to touch the road, it isn’t that you can drive on the road and fly without having to switch vehicles.
I think the safety issue is one that can be licked, but is probably 50 years away, just like controlled Fusion has been for the last 50 years. You need to beat the fuel issue, low speed flying is pretty inefficient, and have full computer control, centrally monitored to manage the flight paths.
IMHO, the point of the flying-car fantasy is that they’ll be affordable and most people will have them. We already have had special projects that were flying cars to one degree or another, and we could in theory let airplanes use the roads. What we don’t have is the Flying Model T making it a universal experience, and that’s what people wish for when they pine for flying cars.
Not me – I’ve seen the rest of you drive. shudder
It’s hard enough keeping track of assholes in 2 dimensions. I don’t want them falling on me, too.
Imagine traffic as it is today.
Take away the lights, lines and signs, all ditches and fences, all road signs.
Now cringe.
Aviation used to be more accessible to the masses, or at least the middle class masses. Back before liability issues in the 80’s shut down a lot of the small plane manufacturers, small planes weren’t that expensive. The statistic I’ve seen is that back in 1982, a base Cessna 172 cost about the same as a top-of-the-line Corvette. These days it’s more like 3-4 times. The used plane market also used to behave a bit more like the used car market, and you could pretty easily pick up a used plane for around the same price as a new family sedan.
Of course, the reputation small planes got as “yuppie killers” around the same time suggests some of the fears expressed in this thread are not unfounded.
One of the things futurists tend to forget is that humanity itself doesn’t advance the way our technology goes. Most people still can’t safely walk, much less pilot a one ton vehicle in 2 dimensions. Add a 3rd dimension and the slaughter will be even more unbelievable than it is now.
That being said, I could see it working if the requirements for getting a flying car are similar to that for getting a pilots’ license. It’s just that the majority of people would not be able to qualify.
Can you imagine trying to convince Grandma that her eyesight and coordination aren’t good enough any more to out for a trip to church or the store?
It’s a car, but it flies. Grandma doesn’t demand the right to fly now, she shouldn’t in the future either.
Just so long as the requirements remain steep enough that it’s not considered a must to have a flying car. Cars became darn near universal because the authorities made it so that nearly anyone could legally drive one, leaving those that don’t as strange people that society looks down upon(unless they live in New York, where most people don’t drive).
You don’t necessarily have to convince her; you may just report it to the appropriate licensing authority and leave the dicision up to them.