Where Are the Flying Cars? 362
Ponca City, We Love You writes "Complaints of the non-existence of flying cars as expressions of disappointment in the failure of the present to measure up to the glory of past predictions have long been a staple of popular culture but all that is about to change when Terrafugia introduces their $148,000 "Transition," a 19-foot, two-seater that the company describes as a roadable light-sport aircraft. The problem is that the U.S. doesn't have the infrastructure in place to make landing in front of your house a viable alternative yet and a sky filled with people who don't have pilot's licenses could also be a problem. The idea is to take advantage of the 6,000 public airports in the U.S. so a pilot can fly into a small airport (video) and instead of getting a rental car, just fold up the wings on the aircraft and drive away. Terrafugia expects the first production model to be ready in 2009 and says they've already received advanced orders for 30 to 50 Transitions."
Safety... (Score:2, Interesting)
Please tag article as nothanks (Score:3, Interesting)
Why on earth would anyone want that teenager/clothes changer/parent/eater/drunk driver to be piloting anything over my house, head, or anything else. It's bad enough that we have drunk pilots, but imagine the nightmare when it is really difficult to be "pulled over", as that involves landing somewhere unscheduled.
Not to mention the noise and air pollution. Go up in a hot air balloon, and you'll realize how well sound travels when there is nothing to block it. When you're up, you can have a conversation with two people on he ground at the same time- but they could be a half mile apart from each other. Listen for the airliner flying at 50,000 feet. You can hear it, although faint. Now listen for the cessna flying over head at 1000 feet. Imagine the sky filled with that sound from hundreds of them.
Please people, the fact that we don't have flying cars is a good thing.
There are several reasons why it isn't feasible. (Score:3, Interesting)
- Safety for everyone on the ground.
- Safety for driver and passengers.
- Economics - gas prices will go up.
- Legal issues - Is it a car or an aircraft? It may have to cope with regulations from both domains.
- It will be a great getaway-vehicle for bankrobbers.
- Terrorist anybody?
There may be more reasons too...Re:Doesn't work that way (Score:3, Interesting)
1)They are noisy. Don't underestimate this.
2) under massive use and infrequent repair conditions like the average person treats their car the helicopters would have a high failure rate. Look at Afganastan and Iraq. Choppers go down almost monthly. a large enough percentage of those are just mechanical failures. Even if it is only 5% 5% percent in civilian fleet is thousands and thousands.
What we should have more of though are helicopter taxi's. especially for the short commuter routes in between cities. regions where filling a 20 person plane isn't always possible yet the 3-4 hundred mile drive can be done in an two hours by helicopter, saving the person from 4-5 hours of driving. This also has to be priced accordingly. It can't be much more than $100 person or driving becomes cheaper.
Re:Doesn't work that way (Score:2, Interesting)
The real problem is that features which work good on aircraft (especially aerodynamics which help increase speed reduce fuel consumption) don't translate very well to practical (or safe) ground vehicles.
Bullet #2, you're absolutely right. The barrier to entry in the aviation field isn't really very high, as it is, and under-experienced pilots routinely get themselves, their friends and their families, and sometimes random other people killed. Having even more people who are even less experienced buzzing around the skies sends chills down my spine.
Bullet #3, you're right and wrong. I mean, sure, if you lose your engine in a small plane, it's not good--but it's not like you instantly plummet into a mountain side. However, if you're high enough, smart and trained well enough, and aren't flying in conditions beyond your experience and skill level, engine failure shouldn't be a fatal experience. Also, a ton "engine failure" emergencies are the result of the pilot not watching the fuel meter, or forgetting to switch tanks. This is mostly related to bullet #2, idiots in the air. Airframe and control surface failures are very rare, but are one of those things that can make an airplane a giant lawn dart.
Anyway, good points.
Re:Huge blind spots when driving (Score:4, Interesting)
Sorry if I don't agree even though I agree.
A license is not a guarantee of competence. It's a promise of having at least a decent chance at success. I mean, just because somebody screws up after getting a license doesn't mean that the license did no good - it just means that the state has intervened enough to have a reasonable assurance that you *could* succeed.
As a private pilot myself, I think that the requirements for being a pilot are, if anything, not severe enough. When you factor in the enormity of the sky, landing an airplane at a smaller airport is a very, VERY precise maneuver, even with a fairly inefficient spam-can like a Cessna 172. You have maybe 50 feet of vertical space that you have to be dead-on-the-money within, or you'll either go around or die trying. And you'd better know what you're doing well enough to recognize when things aren't going right and get out of there for a go-around.
Yes, it can be quite dangerous (lethal!) unless you know WTF you are doing. Yes, it's intense.
And yes, it's a hell of a lotta fun! =)
But don't think even for a minute that the license does no good. I initially was skeptical of all the information I was pumped with, but about 2/3 of the way through to getting my private, it dawned on me that this wasn't about remembering some facts for a test, it's about saving my silly neck from certain death.
Re:hmm (Score:3, Interesting)
You are, eh, kidding... right? This (for me) would be the PERFECT business vehicle... I frequently travel on mid-range hops. Typical trip is around 200-500 miles. Just far enough that I spend *alot* of time driving, and where taking a plane (Hello, SouthWest!) along with the hotel expenses, rental car, etc. is only marginally better than driving.
So, I got my pilots license, thinking that a private plane would be better. And in many cases, it is. But the bugger is that even though flying a small plane is about 2.5-3x faster than driving (~ 2x the speed, and the trip is straight instead of following some road that rarely goes "straight" from A to B) the bugger is that any bad weather makes it pretty much a non-starter.
Additional training would make me an instrument-only capable pilot (called IFR for "Instrument Flight Rules") but even then, there are plenty of storms you just don't want to fly in, even though driving would be fine.
This car would be the best of both worlds. I could fly anytime there's an airport nearby (and there ALWAYS is) and still have a backup plan when the weather goes south.
I WANT I WANT I WANT I WANT I WANT...
Re:Doesn't work that way (Score:3, Interesting)
Common misconception. Most people think of a "stall" like a car, where the motor dies. But in a plane, a "stall" has almost nothing to do with the engine, it has to do with the "angle of attack" and the airspeed, and simply means that your wings have stopped lifting the plane. Recovering from a stall is so easy that if you simply let go of the yoke, the plane will almost always right itself and recover automatically.
Most people picture the plane in an engine dying and then it sinks like a brick, like Wile E. Coyote 3 seconds after running off the edge of the cliff. But that's simply not how it is.
When a car motor dies on the freeway your car coasts to a stop. Similarly, when the motor in a plane dies, it glides downward. You have a surprising amount of options below you almost everywhere (except very mountainous areas) that are quite safe to put down a "dead" plane.
Safety note: 8 of 10 reported aircraft incidents involving power failure result in no injuries at all and that doesn't include the accidents involving power failure where no report was made. As a pilot, one of the things you train for is how to keep your head, glide with maximum efficiency (so you have the most time in the air) and safely put the plane down without engine power.
I practiced this maneuver probably 40 times until I was landing spot-on every time before I went for my private pilots' license.
And yes, I'd practically sell my grandmother to get one of these conversion planes if it actually worked...