Flying cars coming in 2011!

[pstrbrc]

Originally Posted by Christopher Jordan

(no, not that one) :
Terrafugia - Transition®, the Roadable Light Sport Aircraft : Home
9 photos:
Flying car... coming 2011

Hmmm....
Now, since this IS a "fuel economy is important" site, I'll be the first to point out that as a car, its FE is gonna suck, and as a plane, its FE is gonna suck, all because it has way too many compromises to be either a good car, or a good plane. And the FAA will still require a full preflight, with physical walkaround. And taking off from I-70 would be just as illegal with this as it would with a Cessna 172.

[Frank Lee]

They claim 30mpg ground and better gph than the C152.

[MadisonMPG]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

They claim 30mpg ground and better gph than the C152.

We also have a twin turbo Corvette that claims 10 million MPG and 5 thousand horsepower.

[Frank Lee]

With 100HP, low weight and probably half-way decent aero, I think these MIT guys might have a shot at achieving their claims.

[bondo]

Here is a model of a design concept for a flying car I did about 5 years ago.

A flying car is a complex vehicle fraught with design challenges. My hat's off to the young Grads of MIT who have built the Terrafugia. I have to agree with Frank they may well have at shot at some success.

Bondo

[jesse.rizzo]

Just to clarify, this isn't being considered a flying car, it's a "roadable aircraft". You will still need your pilot certificate to take the thing in the air, and can only legally do so from an airport. It won't likely be piloted by soccer moms on their cell phones, but pilots who wish to be able to store their aircraft in their home garage.

[meanjoe75fan]

There have been so many attempts to make flying cars, ever since the end of WWII, and none of them have ever panned out.

Because of this fact, my initial reaction to "Flying cars in 2011!" Was to think of the sign behind the bar: "Free beer tomorrow!"

[bestclimb]

Since when is it only legal to operate an aircraft from an airport? There may be state laws here and there, but nothing in the FARs (federal air regulations) as far as I know. The main reason I would not want to operate an aircraft from a road is obstructions such as power lines, skinny approaches betwix trees, annoying my neighors, other traffic. If I was flying over some empty bit of highway in rural Nevada or something and had to pee, I would think nothing of landing on the road and pulling off to do my business.

For the price it has a pretty limited target consumer. For about half, you could get any number of aircraft with similar (likely better) specs and a car (or a bunch of car rental at your destinations). I wish them well as the concept is neat and I like jack of all trades type things but I suspect this one will go the way of all the other caroplanes, aerocars and what not. Mediocre performance compared to it's contemporaries in all configurations at a higher price.

As far as the specs go, advertised specs with factory test pilot, with the aircraft constantly in perfect (or nearly so) rigging flown mostly in ideal conditions rarely end up doing so well in the real world.

If I want to keep a plane at home, (and I would love to) take the money from the place I currently live, add 100,000 from not buying this thing, and build myself a hanger home on a private strip. The premium for a lot on an airpark is about 30,000-50,000 over a comparable lot away from the airport at least it is up here, I have no idea what it is like down in America.

[Dennis D'Angelo]

Maybe we should combine bicycling with powered paragliding--a little less expensive? See attached

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H430P...eature=related

dd

[dcb]

though not the most efficient looking machine, it is way cool fly somewhere, land, drive, very affordable looking.