Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation

DOT Exempts Maker of 'Flying Car' From Road Vehicle Safety Rules 142

Stirfry192 writes with news that Terrafugia, makers of a vehicle alternately called a 'flying car' or 'roadable aircraft,' have been granted a three-year exemption to federal motor vehicle safety rules in order to foster further development and innovation. "The DOT granted the three-year 'hardship' exemption because it bought the argument from Terrafugia that its attempt to comply with DOT regulations at the same time as Federal Aviation Administration rules would be prohibitively expensive. Terrafugia had argued that an exemption would allow it more time to research more appropriate solutions to the requirements at the same time as making the flying car a feasible project. The company, an MIT spin-off located in Woburn, Mass. intends to use motor-cycle tires and rims instead of tires usually used for regular cars. The purpose is to minimize the weight of the craft."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

DOT Exempts Maker of 'Flying Car' From Road Vehicle Safety Rules

Comments Filter:
  • by jonamous++ ( 1687704 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2011 @08:29AM (#36670690)
    I think this is really cool but it seems impractical. Aircraft are very expensive to maintain and you'll need a pilot certificate to fly this. It's probably cheaper to have a car and rent a plane (or, depending on the cost of this thing, just buy a used 172). The usable load is very low, as well (hopefully that 330lbs number is in addition to fuel).

    I also look at this from the perspective of being a "dual-purpose" vehicle; most of which are mediocre. A common example might be a dual-sport motorcycle. It's not a great motorcycle and it's not a great dirtbike, but it can do both. Just from the looks (wings all folded up, blocking vision out of the rear windows, etc) this is not going to be a practical car. I guess we'll see how good of an airplane it will be. My question is, what problem does this solve? You drive to the airport, unfold the wings, then get out of the car and do your pre-flight? How is that different from getting out of your car and doing your pre-flight on your regular aircraft?

    Either way, this seems like a neat invention. I think they'll have trouble selling 200 of these, especially if they are priced similarly to normal small aircraft, but it would be really cool to see this thing in person.
  • by sapphire wyvern ( 1153271 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2011 @08:47AM (#36670858)

    This isn't a flying car. It's a driveable aircraft. I think the main problem it solves is that with a conventional light aircraft, you drive to the airport, pre-flight your aircraft, take off, fly to your destination, land... and then you're stuck. Many light aircraft airports don't have car hire facilities nearby, and they're often some way from any place you actually want to be. With the Terrafugia, you can at least in principal land the thing at an airfield and then drive it to your final destination (eg a hotel or tourist landmark or business or whatever).

    On the other hand I'm not sure how much I'd want to drive this thing on the road. Seems like it would be a great way to ruin your airplane. And, furthermore, you'd have to count on there being adequate garaging facilities at your destination; I don't think this vehicle would want to be outside in heavy weather.

  • by whizbang77045 ( 1342005 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2011 @08:52AM (#36670906)
    "Flying cars" or "roadable aircraft" have been designed and built many times in the past. There's always a lot of enthusiasm during the design phase, when public demonstrations are made, and colorful brochures are handed out. When it comes to actually buying one, though, the public, both flying and non-flying, always stay away in droves. I'd be very surprised if this one is any different.

    As others have pointed out, there are a lot of problems, both regulatory and practical, that make this a costly and difficult ventures. Save your money; buy something really practical, like a flying saucer that works only in ground effect.

  • Re:Bad Precedent (Score:4, Insightful)

    by qwijibo ( 101731 ) on Wednesday July 06, 2011 @10:02AM (#36671472)

    I suspect that in general, the people who have the time and money to build kit/custom cars have the money to put up a bond to self-insure.

    I doubt any auto maker is big enough to lock electric cars out of the market by controlling insurance companies. There will always be someone who is willing to insure electric cars if there are enough of them on the road to make it profitable. Worst case scenario would be the electric car manufacturer also being the insurer. It may be a headache for early adopters, but the market will work it out.

UNIX is hot. It's more than hot. It's steaming. It's quicksilver lightning with a laserbeam kicker. -- Michael Jay Tucker

Working...