Looks like an extended version of the ultralight trike: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultralight_trike
Even closer to a powered parachute: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powered_parachute
Flying Car (and 0-60 in less than 4 seconds!)
21–30 of 73 posts
Re: Flying Car (and 0-60 in less than 4 seconds!)
#22For those who are wondering about price - looks like it will be sold for $84,000... not bad!
Re: Flying Car (and 0-60 in less than 4 seconds!)
#23Wow, that's great. Here's a video showing more taking off, flying, etc: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8b0oR0-Pgo
Re: Flying Car (and 0-60 in less than 4 seconds!)
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
The only logical use case is as a driving plane, because using it as a car more than the absolute minimum necessary would be prohibitively expensive. First: insurance. You would have to insure it as both a plane and as a car, and insurance companies aren't going to know how to handle that, which means they'll either refuse to touch it or charge a premium. Even if such vehicles became common enough for insurance compa…
Airplane maintenance is way more expensive than car maintenance, but every hour you drive this thing on the road will count as an hour towards maintenance required at airplane rates. Yes, but this isn't an airplane. It's a flying car ;) Seriously, the maintenance comparison wouldn't appear to be the same. It looks like this thing has a propeller attached to a drag style engine. I would expect maintenance costs to be…
The reason airplane maintenance is expensive isn't just that airplanes are generally more complex. It's mainly because you have to pay a certified A&P[1] to do it. You're not just paying for the work, you're paying for the entire apparatus of certifications and inspections that backs it up.
>Also, by law to drive (in California at least) you're only required to have liability insurance covering the party you hit. Covering your own vehicle is optional.
If you go this route, you have an even bigger incentive to keep it off the road: if you get into a fender-bender, you'll have to pay to the exorbitant repair bill on your "car."
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Maintenance_Technician...
Re: Flying Car (and 0-60 in less than 4 seconds!)
#25Going from 0-60 quickly in a flying vehicle isn't difficult until you hit the ground.
Re: Flying Car (and 0-60 in less than 4 seconds!)
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
Airplane maintenance is way more expensive than car maintenance, but every hour you drive this thing on the road will count as an hour towards maintenance required at airplane rates. Yes, but this isn't an airplane. It's a flying car ;) Seriously, the maintenance comparison wouldn't appear to be the same. It looks like this thing has a propeller attached to a drag style engine. I would expect maintenance costs to be…
The reason airplane maintenance is expensive isn't just that airplanes are generally more complex. It's mainly because you have to pay a certified A&P[1] to do it. You're not just paying for the work, you're paying for the entire apparatus of certifications and inspections that backs it up. > Also, by law to drive (in California at least) you're only required to have liability insurance covering the party you hit. Co…
Sure, using an A&P is fine. I'd still imagine the maintenance costs on this thing, consisting mostly of a drag engine, propeller, and chute would be less costly than that of a traditional airplane wouldn't you agree?
I do agree it would certainly make sense to opt in for covering the car as well. I was mostly making the point the liability rule could be a baseline showing insurance companies had no reason to charge a higher rate than, say, a sports car (under a minimum coverage scenario where they cover only liability costs).
It appears this vehicle costs $84K. I believe any person able to afford a 100K class of car would certainly be able to pay the maintenance and insurance costs to drive it as a car ;)
Re: Flying Car (and 0-60 in less than 4 seconds!)
#27A very similar design to these guys:
http://www.skycarexpedition.com/about_skycar.php
I wonder who has been working on it the longest?
http://www.gizmag.com/the-parajet-skycar-britains-flying-dun...
Re: Flying Car (and 0-60 in less than 4 seconds!)
#28Going from 0-60 quickly in a flying vehicle isn't difficult until you hit the ground.
watch the video. learn something.
Re: Flying Car (and 0-60 in less than 4 seconds!)
#29The big problem with his "stuck in traffic" scenario is how do you find the space to take off. Not to mention the legality of the whole thing. Granted, it's a really cool demo, but he needs to admit that there is little real-world practicality.
Well you don't have to be stuck in traffic. Your Android or iPhone could tell you there is a major traffic jam up ahead or you might know that between x-y time, you'll hit the daily commute rush. That way you could just "take off" from your street where you know there is clear skys and low traffic.
Re: Flying Car (and 0-60 in less than 4 seconds!)
#30The big problem with his "stuck in traffic" scenario is how do you find the space to take off. Not to mention the legality of the whole thing. Granted, it's a really cool demo, but he needs to admit that there is little real-world practicality.
His focus is on serving the third world. It is clear in the video you need a runway and you don't have one when stuck in traffic. Or probably the room you need to deploy the wing. I think he should play up the fact that this takes off with half the speed Marty McFly would need to turn on his flux capacitor.
It is clear in the video you need a runway
He said it could take off from a football field and clear the stanchions. It evidently needs a 300 foot unpaved field and a bit of space around it without anything exceedingly tall. That's pretty good performance, and you can get by with a lot less than a proper runway, but it can't take off from a traffic jam.