Flying Cars Still Stuck On The Ground
Flying cars have been promised to us by prognosticators of high tech futures since the 1950's. With atomic power, everything seemed possible. But with nuclear power confined to large scale operations (utilities, submarines, aircraft carriers), flying cars remained solidly within the realms of science fiction. Flying car fans had to settle for high tech wet dream films like "Blade Runner" and "The Fifth Element." But some engineers never gave up on the dream.
Fed up with gridlock on Connecticut's highways, Paul Dev, of D-Star Engineering, has been working on V/STOL (Vertical or Short TakeOff and Landing) vehicles for several years. This article states that he's filed a patent for just such a vehicle. His design utilizes several small enclosed fans ("small" when compared to a helicopter's blades) to provide lift. Each of these fans will have an electric power source. No details as to its performance or even if there's a prototype. So we can leave this one in the pipe dream category, at least for now.
Terrafugia has developed a 1/5 scale model of it Transition™ aircraft and tested it in MIT wind tunnels. In essence, it's a regular plane that you can drive on the road because its wings retract. Nothing fancy about the engine. They expect to get 30/30/40 mpg air/city/highway. If you take a look at the thing, you're not gonna want to take it very far on the highway. And for $150,000 you can park it in your garage. I'm going to file this one in the expensive hobby category. We'll see if they meet their 2008/2009 prototype/production deadlines.
While these relative newcomers fiddle about with their models and blueprints, one
man has been slavishly working for decades: Paul Moller. He started building prototypes back in the 60's out of his garage. Over time, he piqued the curiousity of investors and formed Moller International (MLER on the Pink Sheets I think). His latest prototype is the M400, a sleek looking VTOL with 4 turbofans and retractable wings. The Moller engine is an outgrowth of the Wankel rotary engine but with many fewer moving parts. It's capable of 30-35 mph on the ground 275-375 mph in the air (depending on altitude). It gets 20 mpg, which better than most SUV's, and will run on ethanol or gasoline. The company prefers ethanol because the craft's engine temperature ran cooler and the emissions made it compatible with California's regulations. I was tempted to add them to my speculative investing account, but held off because I thought that they were still too far away from market. Consider this one practical.
But what are the drawbacks and hurdles to the Moller and its kin? Well, the Moller is expected to cost $500,000 once it's finally approved by the FAA. That's about the price of a helicopter. If mass production ever kicks in, the price could drop to luxury car price levels.
And it's approval by the FAA and getting insurance companies to provide reasonable fees that should be the biggest hurdles. I don't think that the FAA is ready for this. If this goes into mass production, how will the skies stay under control? Since the Moller can take off from anywhere, what's to stop someone from just taking off from someone's driveway? Not every city has an airport to monitor the traffic in its skies and when an aircraft is too close to the ground it's "under the radar." Unless this thing has seriously advanced proximity sensors and radar built in, what's to prevent collisions? While there are parachutes built in, would they deploy in time if some schmuck collides with another schmuck 100 feet above the ground? Moller's FAQ downplays the likelihood of congestion over cities but I think that they're being hopelessly naive or they're intentionally hoping no one will notice. And what about loading one of these things up with explosives and going kamikaze for Allah?
Don't get me wrong, I think that the M400 is very cool and I'd love to have one of my own. But in our litigous society, is there anyway that the M400, or its kin, will be able to cut through the red tape to get airborne?
\_/
DED
Fed up with gridlock on Connecticut's highways, Paul Dev, of D-Star Engineering, has been working on V/STOL (Vertical or Short TakeOff and Landing) vehicles for several years. This article states that he's filed a patent for just such a vehicle. His design utilizes several small enclosed fans ("small" when compared to a helicopter's blades) to provide lift. Each of these fans will have an electric power source. No details as to its performance or even if there's a prototype. So we can leave this one in the pipe dream category, at least for now.
Terrafugia has developed a 1/5 scale model of it Transition™ aircraft and tested it in MIT wind tunnels. In essence, it's a regular plane that you can drive on the road because its wings retract. Nothing fancy about the engine. They expect to get 30/30/40 mpg air/city/highway. If you take a look at the thing, you're not gonna want to take it very far on the highway. And for $150,000 you can park it in your garage. I'm going to file this one in the expensive hobby category. We'll see if they meet their 2008/2009 prototype/production deadlines.
While these relative newcomers fiddle about with their models and blueprints, one
man has been slavishly working for decades: Paul Moller. He started building prototypes back in the 60's out of his garage. Over time, he piqued the curiousity of investors and formed Moller International (MLER on the Pink Sheets I think). His latest prototype is the M400, a sleek looking VTOL with 4 turbofans and retractable wings. The Moller engine is an outgrowth of the Wankel rotary engine but with many fewer moving parts. It's capable of 30-35 mph on the ground 275-375 mph in the air (depending on altitude). It gets 20 mpg, which better than most SUV's, and will run on ethanol or gasoline. The company prefers ethanol because the craft's engine temperature ran cooler and the emissions made it compatible with California's regulations. I was tempted to add them to my speculative investing account, but held off because I thought that they were still too far away from market. Consider this one practical.
But what are the drawbacks and hurdles to the Moller and its kin? Well, the Moller is expected to cost $500,000 once it's finally approved by the FAA. That's about the price of a helicopter. If mass production ever kicks in, the price could drop to luxury car price levels.
And it's approval by the FAA and getting insurance companies to provide reasonable fees that should be the biggest hurdles. I don't think that the FAA is ready for this. If this goes into mass production, how will the skies stay under control? Since the Moller can take off from anywhere, what's to stop someone from just taking off from someone's driveway? Not every city has an airport to monitor the traffic in its skies and when an aircraft is too close to the ground it's "under the radar." Unless this thing has seriously advanced proximity sensors and radar built in, what's to prevent collisions? While there are parachutes built in, would they deploy in time if some schmuck collides with another schmuck 100 feet above the ground? Moller's FAQ downplays the likelihood of congestion over cities but I think that they're being hopelessly naive or they're intentionally hoping no one will notice. And what about loading one of these things up with explosives and going kamikaze for Allah?
Don't get me wrong, I think that the M400 is very cool and I'd love to have one of my own. But in our litigous society, is there anyway that the M400, or its kin, will be able to cut through the red tape to get airborne?
\_/
DED
Labels: cars
posted by DED at 6:10 PM
9 Comments:
Ded, I need to get me one of those things! Now, the pricetag may be a bit of a sticking point... maybe I can be a "test drive (um, pilot?)" for them and get a deal. he he he
Cool shit, DED. That Terrafugia is one . . . shall we say, cumbersome machine though.
Mike E: I'm sure that they're always looking for guinea pigs... errr uhhh licensed test pilots.
Mike of the Neighborhood: "Cumbersome" is quite polite of you. I'd call the Terrafugia stylishly clueless and barely useful. Driving a car with the performance of a turtle to the airport to fly to another airport in order to return to turtle mode is impractical. Moller's got it right. In order to make a flying car "practical" it needs to be able to take off and land anywhere, at least physically if not legally.
I think there's a more fundamental question we should ask: Are humans designed to navigate in 3D? We are terrestrial animals, after all. We're good at crawling around the skin of the Earth, including climbing up and down on its wrinkles. But imagine a vehicle that calls on everyone who drives it to be able to think and navigate like a pilot or a submarine captain.
"He's intelligent, but not experienced. His pattern indicates... two-dimensional thinking."
Good point. Some people are capable of 3D thinking: helicopter pilots. Right now, one would need to have a VTOL license to fly the M400 and the Terrafugia would require a regular pilot's license.
There's a contest out there to see who can make a flying car that's no more complicated to drive than a ground car. And, once computing advances a bit further, there's no reason not to expect Big Mother from making us put flying cars on autopilot. I know that there's a serious effort underway to put our ground cars on autopilot.
I know that there's a serious effort underway to put our ground cars on autopilot.
Whoa. Fuck that noise. I don't even trust that new car that parallel parks for you. Besides, driving is fun.
I agree with you, but Big Mother and the auto insurance companies think that they know what's best.
Test cars are being equipped with sensors which detect other cars (and communicate with them) and beacons and markers in the road in order to stay on course. But since all roads aren't created equal, it's not likely that this method will be practical beyond urban areas and new roads. Mother Nature also has a way of messing things up.
The more likely scenario will be what DARPA commissioned others to do and that was for a vehicle to drive autonomously over wilderness terrain to a target. You may have heard about the race. The first year, no one made it across the finish line. Last year, someone did. If a car can navigate through the Mojave Desert without us, then it's just a matter of cost before it trickles down to everyday use.
Hey Ded, I know the people working on the MIT project. Or more accurately one of their mothers. I'd be impressed by her endless bragging if I thought the product had a more chance of... getting off the ground, so to speak.
So it would appear that my skepticism ("expensive hobby") is well grounded. Oh the puns.... ;)
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home