Where The Hell Are The Flying Cars? It's The 21st Century!

Discussion in 'New Science' started by Mighty_Emperor, Sep 2, 2004.

  1. Gambeir

    Gambeir Devoted Cultist

    Messages:
    214
    Likes Received:
    157
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Flying cars will never be in the grasp of peons. I've looked at a number of the designs and while innovative and potentially useful, the vast majority would be prohibited from population centers, noise being a huge issue already but one plummenting through the roof would be the next problem. There's just no way unless they were robotically controlled and anyone climbing about a robot controlled machine, of any kind, is asking for it.

    Let's hope you're not holding valuable patent rights or could in other way be a potentially useful fool.

    Aside from all that, I've spent a couple years now deciphering the McCandlish illustration. There's no doubt in my mind that any propeller driven machine is akin to a donkey cart. The ability to create machines which can overcome gravity is well within the powers of present manufacturing. They know it, I know it, and so do many others.

    Rest assured, regardless of what the rulers want, this so-called anti-gravity system will become available. The system has been deciphered sufficiently to understand the driving principles. Knowledge is spreading and once it's out there, like it is now, then the inevitable will manifest itself for personal use.

    Don't be an idiot, these things they are calling flying cars are last century transport and they know it.
     
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2018
    PeteByrdie likes this.
  2. Yithian

    Yithian Intergalactic Space Crusader Staff Member

    Messages:
    20,161
    Likes Received:
    14,830
    Trophy Points:
    309
    WEBSITE:
    http://petergreenaway.org.uk/drowning.htm
  3. Mythopoeika

    Mythopoeika I am a meat popsicle

    Messages:
    30,150
    Likes Received:
    13,913
    Trophy Points:
    284
    LOCATION:
    Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
    ramonmercado, Timble2 and Tigerhawk like this.
  4. Gambeir

    Gambeir Devoted Cultist

    Messages:
    214
    Likes Received:
    157
    Trophy Points:
    43
    That's actually really cool.
     
  5. hunck

    hunck Justified & Ancient

    Messages:
    2,948
    Likes Received:
    2,884
    Trophy Points:
    159
    Autonomous flying taxi beginning regulatory approval process in New Zealand

    Short video at link. Would you get in one of these?

    [​IMG]
     
  6. Andy X

    Andy X Portent

    Messages:
    3,028
    Likes Received:
    3,037
    Trophy Points:
    154
    LOCATION:
    Larch Forest
    No, I'd get in a Cessna 150. They generally have ashtrays.
     
  7. Mythopoeika

    Mythopoeika I am a meat popsicle

    Messages:
    30,150
    Likes Received:
    13,913
    Trophy Points:
    284
    LOCATION:
    Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
  8. INT21

    INT21 Justified & Ancient

    Messages:
    2,034
    Likes Received:
    1,084
    Trophy Points:
    154
    Flying cars won't happen. Too risky.

    INT21
     
  9. Bigphoot2

    Bigphoot2 Carbon Based Infestation

    Messages:
    4,770
    Likes Received:
    9,129
    Trophy Points:
    219
    Another attempt
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44805697
     
  10. Mythopoeika

    Mythopoeika I am a meat popsicle

    Messages:
    30,150
    Likes Received:
    13,913
    Trophy Points:
    284
    LOCATION:
    Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
    Looks pretty futuristic...but also a bit slow and a bit unstable.
    And...what happens if the motors fail?

    It's great to see these prototypes actually flying. Moller's car is never seen flying untethered.
     
  11. EnolaGaia

    EnolaGaia I knew the job was dangerous when I took it ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    6,463
    Likes Received:
    5,976
    Trophy Points:
    294
    LOCATION:
    USA
    Same as your radio controlled drone toys - they fall out of the sky, and there's no particular reason to believe they'll hit the ground right-side-up ...

    Neither the BlackFly nor the KittyHawk Flyer have wing structures suggesting any ability to glide toward a dead-stick landing.

    A deployable parachute would seem a reasonable and feasible precaution, but I've yet to see any start-up 'flying car' descriptions that mention any attention being given to emergency preparedness.

    Similarly, I've yet to see any developer mention whether the vehicles' props would / could disengage and free-wheel to afford a slower, potentially non-fatal, descent like a gyrocopter. My impression is that none of these prototypes has enough prop span to provide such braking in unpowered descent.

    The KittyHawk Cora air taxi concept, however, has fixed wing structures which might afford enough lift to glide to a dead-stick non-fatal landing.

    The drone-style multi-rotor prototypes are all designed for VTOL, and this absolutely relies upon props-under-power.

    I'd also suspect that the VTOL motif is one reason why operators needn't be certified like 'regular' private pilots. I therefore suspect a lack of training on conventional landings will be cited in innumerable accident reports in the not too distant future.
     
    Cochise and Mythopoeika like this.
  12. GNC

    GNC King-Sized Canary

    Messages:
    23,778
    Likes Received:
    7,182
    Trophy Points:
    284
    I think even a pogo stick car would be safer.
     
  13. Mythopoeika

    Mythopoeika I am a meat popsicle

    Messages:
    30,150
    Likes Received:
    13,913
    Trophy Points:
    284
    LOCATION:
    Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
    Definitely:
    [​IMG]
     
  14. INT21

    INT21 Justified & Ancient

    Messages:
    2,034
    Likes Received:
    1,084
    Trophy Points:
    154
    EnolaGaia,

    ...I'd also suspect that the VTOL motif is one reason why operators needn't be certified like 'regular' private pilots...

    Are you sure about this ?

    I was under the impression that even gyro pilots need to have passed a basic fixed-wing training course before being let loose in the air.

    It's not just the actual ability to fly the thing but also the need to know about avoiding airports etc. Even for VFR flying.

    Any way,flying cars will never happen. Far to many ways to kill the pilot, passengers and others on the ground.

    And what a neat bomb delivery system !

    INT21

    Edit to correct typo. 'Fat' should read 'far'.
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2018
  15. EnolaGaia

    EnolaGaia I knew the job was dangerous when I took it ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    6,463
    Likes Received:
    5,976
    Trophy Points:
    294
    LOCATION:
    USA
    At least in the US, there's been no movement toward mandating training or certification for operating a personal 'flying car' (as contrasted with a formally defined aircraft).

    One reason for this is the popular notion such personal vehicles would be VTOL craft operated to / from home (and / or wherever ... ) without the need to use airfield / airport facilities.

    I hope the prospective operational environment will be made more controlled and regulated before these vehicles are unleashed on the general public.

    You'd think that after 2/3 of a century I'd know better than to pin hopes on my fellow monkey-folks' rationality, but ...
     
  16. INT21

    INT21 Justified & Ancient

    Messages:
    2,034
    Likes Received:
    1,084
    Trophy Points:
    154
    That's interesting.

    I was in an argument with some cyclist about the legality of riding a cycle on a public footpath. After all, footpaths (sidewalks) are there to allow people to walk without run down by cars etc.So I looked it up.

    Cycles are classed as vehicles for the purpose of the road traffic act in the UK.

    It brings a fixed penalty fine of £30. I can't recall anyone ever being brought before a court for this though.

    So I am surprised that the USA considers it safe to let people loose in the air in flying cars without training.

    INT21
     
    Cochise likes this.
  17. AlchoPwn

    AlchoPwn Abominable Snowman

    Messages:
    584
    Likes Received:
    663
    Trophy Points:
    93
    I think your outrageous claims demand some sort of evidence. Humanity has barely discovered the Higgs Boson. The notion that we have overcome gravity in any way other than the conventional lighter-than-air/propeller driven/rocketry/jet engine/projectile methods is not very plausible Gambier. I am not saying you are wrong, but if you are going to say something like this, don't you think you should offer some proof?
     
  18. INT21

    INT21 Justified & Ancient

    Messages:
    2,034
    Likes Received:
    1,084
    Trophy Points:
    154
    ...but if you are going to say something like this, don't you think you should offer some proof?...

    Hear, hear.

    If not particularly illuminating it should be at least entertaining.

    INT21
     
  19. Cochise

    Cochise Justified & Ancient

    Messages:
    4,204
    Likes Received:
    2,890
    Trophy Points:
    159
    LOCATION:
    Gwynedd, Wales
    No, you can be a 'Gyro Only' pilot. But even gyros are far more dangerous than a car. A good friend of mine who had graduated to being not only a pilot but a trainer was nearly killed when a trainee panicked and violently grabbed the stick. And that was only in a towed training gyro, not a powered one.
     
  20. INT21

    INT21 Justified & Ancient

    Messages:
    2,034
    Likes Received:
    1,084
    Trophy Points:
    154
    Cochise,

    Yes, you are correct. Here are the important bits from the CAA.

    How much training will you need?
    Everyone differs in their learning ability. Legally you require a minimum of 40 hours of training. Of these 40 hours at least 15 hours must be under dual instruction and at least 10 must be flown solo under the supervision of an instructor. The other 15 hours can be dual or solo as required. These are minimum requirements but a student with good aptitude, enthusiam and dedication should expect to train for between 40 and 50 hours.

    Looks pretty expensive to me.

    INT21
     
  21. Mikefule

    Mikefule Michael Wilkinson

    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    202
    Trophy Points:
    39
    Flying cars are a fun idea, but an idea that is just silly.

    We already have small helicopters. They can take off vertically, fly at speed and land vertically. We already have cars that can do the other parts of the role.

    For obvious safety and traffic control reasons, the number of places a flying car could land would be limited. Would you then want to drive the rest of your journey in a "car" cluttered with the weight and ungainly bulk of aero engines, propellors and rotors? If you could afford a flying car, you could afford a taxi or limousine to meet you at your landing place, in which case, why not just use a helicopter for the flying part?

    Flying in clear visibility and low wind speeds in uncluttered air space with easy topography is "easy enough" although you'd still need the training in all the safety and air traffic control protocols. As soon as the wind gets up, or it becomes foggy or icy, or the topography gets more complex, or there are tall buildings or other aircraft in the vicinity, the flying becomes considerably more complex. (Fans of Buddy Holly or Patsy Cline will know about what happens when small craft are flown in adverse weather that exceeds the pilot's experience and training.)

    A flying car or amphibious car is trying to do two things with conflicting engineering requirements. It's a gimmick, like a portable radio with integral flashlight and bottle opener, or one of those multi tools that is too bulky to use for undoing a screw in a tight corner.

    At best, flying cars and amphibious cars will never be more than rich people's playthings. I suspect that most of the ones "in development" exist for one of the following purposes:

    1) To generate exciting publicity for a technology firm that never really intends to produce the actual flying/amphibious car, but does want to promote its image and its mainstream products.

    2) To generate a tax loss for creative accounting purposes.

    3) To attract investment from the gullible, with a view to siphoning some of it off — or maybe just having a lot of fun with the project.
     
    Moth In Relay and EnolaGaia like this.
  22. Roland Deschain

    Roland Deschain All things serve the beam

    Messages:
    370
    Likes Received:
    473
    Trophy Points:
    64
    LOCATION:
    Hastings
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44840953

     
    escargot likes this.

Share This Page