Please, don’t insult the noble Cessna in that manner.
Granted, the Cessna is a slow and unsexy airplane, but they’re a workhorse and easy to fly. That’s why they’re like a persistent rash on the face of the planet and there’s more of them than any other sort of airplane.
DARPA is actually considering this:
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=17646b0970db36d42886a253ebf814c7&tab=core&_cview=0
I’m imaging a cruise missile or drone that can travel underwater for part of it’s “flight” path. I can see the utility of that. It’s almost completely hidden for part of it’s flight. Whether or not it’s practical is another question.
I usually think “Blade Runner”, but that works, too.
Excellent point. I apologize to Cessna pilots everywhere.
Seems like research and time that could have been spent making a more widely accessible airplane in the future. That giant car-plane would be an inconvenience on already cluttered roadways due to its width and clumsy in flight due to its overall shape.
Especially this one, right?
Ha-ha - good point.
I was mostly referring to the single-engine variety.
Well, good, the emergency parachute system works…
Baby steps. Well, baby jumps from altitude…
“Jaaaaane! STOP THIS CRAZY THING!!!”
I’m still not gonna be happy if that thing lands on my roof.
As for autonomous planes, actually there’s a good chance we might not even get autonomous cars any time in the forseeable furture. The reason would be liability. If you crash your Toyota Corolla because you were too busy texting to look where you’re going, that’s your own damn fault. But if your autonomous car crashes because of a sensor defect or map error or something, wouldn’t that be Toyota’s fault? Given the current legal climate, it’s hard too see how any company could survive the litigation that would follow the first time a widespread defect cropped up.
Version 4.0 of Aeromobil appeared this month at the IAA auto show in Frankfurt, Germany. The new version seems to have changed significantly in many ways, with a more bulbous nose and a completely different cockpit. Other articles (links in the Media section of the site) say the price tag will be $1.2 to $1.5 million. The Top Gear article has lots of interesting technical detail.
They’re taking pre-orders and hope to have regulatory approvals by 2020. As one article I read said, flying cars are always two years away, and have been for the last 50 years.
In the $1.2 - $1.5 million range, I can have my choice ofa number of helicopters. Couldn’t I just paint a giant H on my driveway and park there?
Heck, I’ve been to a lot of small airports that will provide you with a “courtesy car” at no charge. Of course, sometimes you have to pop the hood and diddle with the bits underneath to get it started, and sometimes the rear-view mirror or other parts fall off, but hey! It’s free!
(Yes, the courtesy car at White County airport really was like that)
There is no way that little turd of an airplane does 300 mph. The range has to be a typo. Their own website says 223 mph on 300 hp and it carries 24 gallons. A normal aviation engine would probably burn 15 gallons an hr. Even if it was ultra efficient at 12 gallons an hour that’s a range of 446 miles with no reserve. If that thing makes it 300 miles legally I’d be impressed.
The problem with this type of airplane/car is that they do nothing well for the money spent. Any advantage of a duel use platform died with Uber. There’s no reason to drive a plane from an airport to final destination when there is cheap/on-demand taxi service. The money wasted on the automotive platform could go into a dedicated airplane that is more efficient.
300 mph is not a range. It is a speed.
Or am I a victim of my unwillingness to read the article linked in the OP (a year ago)?
the article said a range of 900 miles or 3 hrs of flying. 900 miles divided by 3 hrs is 300 mph. From their website the plane carries 24 gallons of fuel. It’s unlikely that equates to 3 hrs of fuel with a 300 hp engine (at 75% power) which would burn 12 gph or more. Therefore, I suggested the range is a type.
The problem with flying cars is this: the features you want in a car (crashworthiness, cargo space, etc.) add weight to it. In order to fly you need to minimize weight. Compare the passenger compartment of a car to that of a light plane. The plane is much smaller.