If so, I’m excited. The article says it is still on track for its first test flight next month, but some news reporters have been bamboozled in the past.
They have been saying that the Terrfugia will be flying “next year” for the last 4 or 5 years.
I’ll believe it when I see it.
I, for one, would not be too comfortable in a plane that can fold it’s wings with the touch of a button. There better be several layers of redundant protection against those folding up in flight.
BTW, that article is two months old. The next month to which the refer would be Nov. I don’t see any indication that it has flown.
There’s nothing new about a “flying car” – many models have been invented. (See the Moller Skycar.) What would be new would be a flying car that is as cheap, as fuel-efficient, and as easy to operate (without any flight school, and without presenting any air-traffic-control problems) as a ground vehicle. Invent that, and the world will beat a path to your door!
I point this out in every flying car thread, so why stop now?
There is not and never will be such a thing as a flying car. The concept is incoherent.
What there is and can be are roadable airplanes. Aircraft that can be driven on surface streets. But imagine the engineering compromises you have to make to get a drivable airplane. Wings that fold. Steering. Large tires. Brakes. Suspension. All add weight, all add weaknesses to the aircraft. Why would you trust your life to an airplane that has wings that are designed to fold? Why would you want an aircraft that had to carry around several hundred pounds of equipment that is useless in the air?
An aircraft designed so that it can be driven down the street is a pretty stupid idea. It doesn’t make sense. How is this aircraft an improvement over a car that you drive to the small airport where you keep your small plane?
The term “flying car” gets people thinking that they can just hop in the thing and take off, easy as driving to McDonalds. Except that can never happen, because flying is not driving. Flying is difficult and dangerous. You wouldn’t think you could fly a light plane just because you have a driver’s license, so why would you think you can fly a flying car without pilot training? You’re really going to trust your life in an experimental aircraft just because it’s so cool that the aircraft can drive down the street? Seriously?
Not necessarily.
Your entire dismissal depends upon the idea that “flying” is by wings – that the flying car flies by means we know today: fixed wing or vertical rotor.
If we imagine an antigravity floating car technology, what does that do to your analysis?
The Moller car is complete vaporware. It doesn’t exist, it has never existed, and it never will exist. It pops up every few years, somehow makes it into reputable news sources, and disappears. It’s a pure scam designed to bilk investors. They’ve been making the same claims and the same promises for over a decade - I can personally attest to that. I remember seeing it online well over ten years ago.
Sorry - they just irritate the hell out of me, so I have to spread the word when I get the chance.
Yeah, the Moller was the one I was referring to when I said that news reporters have been bamboozled in the past. I was just too lazy to look for the name.
Yeah, yeah so they now have a genuine flying car. Big damn deal.
Where’s the nuclear power plant that fits in my closet and can power my whole home.? Dammit, I was promised a nuclear power plant that fits in my closet!
Wouldn’t you rather have one that fits on your flying car?
Well, I’ll take your word for that. But there have been real flying cars. They never caught on because, among other things, they’re too expensive and you have to be an airplane pilot to use them.
Sure, invent antigravity and all bets are off. But antigravity ain’t gonna be invented any time soon, due to those pesky laws of physics.
Barring antigravity, unicorns, warp drive, the philosopher’s stone, and such, flying cars don’t make sense. Roadable airplanes aren’t very cool, and barring magic that’s what we’re stuck with.
I think going to work every day on a flying unicorn would be much more cool than a flying car. Let’s focus research on that.
Granted, it adds risk and complexity. But the Navy has done it for decades. Folded wings make for easier parking on aircraft carriers. I’d say they have been proven structurally sound.
I’m a professional pilot (but never flown in the military), and I’d be open to foldable wings.
My naval aviator friends tell me that wing-fold controls are made intentionally complex so it takes several deliberate moves to operate them.
I disagree. There’s no reason why we won’t have flying cars. What we won’t have is a flying car in every driveway, because people can be barely trusted with ground cars. No reason there can’t be flying car taxi services, piloted by trained pilots.
Just what we need, idiots in three dimensions.
Let’s focus on getting “Minority Report” style travel going. Then I can get where I’m going safer, faster and with LESS work.
So that you can drive it on roads
So that you can drive it home when the weather socks you in at your destination and (more importantly) so that you can drive to your ultimate destination from the nearest airfield.
I don’t fly light aircraft but know people that do. They basically just fly for fun. Theoretically, a light aircraft would be great for travelling to destinations in the few hundred kilometre range. It’s faster than a car, and outside major flight corridors, there’s no traffic. Plus it’s fun and cool. But in reality they don’t fly much as a means of transport because there are a few major drawbacks.
One is that you can get stuck at your destination if the weather turns bad or you are late and night falls and you are not instrument rated. If you could drive your plane home it might take longer but at least you’ll only lose a few hours.
Another is that unless your destination is or has an airfield, you have to hire a car or take a taxi or whatever to go the last few km which is a PITA, even assuming that it’s an airfield that even has hire cars and taxis. If you could just drive your plane to your final destination that would make it a complete transport solution.
I have my doubts about the practicality of the whole driveable plane thing, sure, but saying they have no use is just wrong.
I dunno about you guys, but I don’t want to drive my $194,000 airplane down Bell Road with all the (soon to be $10,000) Expeditions, Hummers, Escalades, etc. Look at that thing and imagine what a side impact would do to it. And imagine what it would cost to insure it.
I don’t remember what they were calling the model, but when I was in grade school 15 years ago we watched a video about a similar flying car that they claimed would be “everywhere” and “available to consumers” within the next 10 years.
Heh, well, yeah. They’ve been saying this since the '50s. That’s what everyone is referring to when they say “where’s my flying car?!”