First flying Car coming in 2015

[Guest EXPAT]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqmILVE7nPQ


The first flying cars are set to go on sale to the public as early as 2015. Terrafugia has announced its Transition design, which is part sedan, part private jet with two seats, four wheels and wings that fold up so it can be driven like a car, will be on sale in less than two years. The Massachusetts-based firm has also unveiled plans for a TF-X model that will be small enough to fit in a garage, and won’t need a runway to take off. Would you buy one?

[MsGuy]

no

[AdamSmith]

no

LOL Right there with you.

Unless the dealer can include RA1 in the deal. I and most people I know find it nontrivial to manage our vehicles in just 2 dimensions.

[Guest Hoover42]

As long as the car flies itself as described in the video, I'd be quite happy to buy one.

[Guest hitoallusa]

How safe is it? Can it driven safely during a heavy storm and etc? I guess our Justin Bieber will toy it around his neighborhood and let us know.. Is it going to disturb his neighbors? I think it will be rich people's car for awhile.. My greatest concern is that I don't like the feeling that it might crash on me suddenly while I'm having a walk and I won't be able to enjoy the view of the sky because of lots of cars moving around.. Maybe I would be dead by then and don't have to worry about it.

[lookin]

Watch this, Elroy! Daddy's going

right between the power lines!

[Suckrates]

YES, of course. I always wanted to be Judy Jetson. And if you give someone a blowjob while in flight, does that qualify you for the mile high club ? Wow, 2 life goals at the same time !

[RA1]

Technically you have to be at least 5,000 feet above sea level to join the mile high club.

The military had tremendous teething problems with the V-22 Osprey. Why will this be different?

We are currently having lots of problems with drones, mostly flown by "experts" if not pilots.

How many of you trust your desktop, laptop or other computerized product to run flawlessly?

It boggles the mind to imagine the chaos of more than a handful of this type product ever reaching the market.

I prefer to wait on a transporter.

Best regards,

RA1

[Guest hitoallusa]

I think turbulence will be a bit rough in a small flying car such that one might get one's throat injured, or worse, might stain one's seats. The worst is ruining your shoes.. So no thanks for the mile high club.

YES, of course. I always wanted to be Judy Jetson. And if you give someone a blowjob while in flight, does that qualify you for the mile high club ? Wow, 2 life goals at the same time !

[Suckrates]

I think turbulence will be a bit rough in a small flying car such that one might get one's throat injured, or worse, might stain one's seats. The worst is ruining your shoes.. So no thanks for the mile high club.

hito, if you ever were in agreement with anything, I'd probably shit my pants ! Oh wait, you are in agreement with liking that Boy douche Bieber..... So that makes you judgemental, with Poor taste !

[AdamSmith]

How many of you trust your desktop, laptop or other computerized product to run flawlessly?

This analogy is spot on. I (and others who are more knowledgeable but, being closer to it, can't afford to say this publicly) remain convinced that Toyota's unintended-acceleration "issues" were due at least in significant part to unforeseen glitches in onboard software management of multiple interacting electromechanical control systems.

Now imagine the same thing happening, but with the added thrill of undesired translation along the Z axis.

[Guest EXPAT]

As he says in the video, for safety all you need to know how to do is pull a lever that will launch a parachute to bring you down safely. I wish it were that simple. But it sounds good.

[AdamSmith]

It is not that hard to have a fatal crash landing from too low an altitude for a parachute to function, I think. As for ejection seats designed to fix that by boosting the ejectee way up high, (1) not so much fun if your craft is not pointing the right way (i.e., up), (2) also no picnic if they fracture your back or neck.

Wonder what insurance will cost?

[Guest Hoover42]

It is not that hard to have a fatal crash landing from too low an altitude for a parachute to function, I think. As for ejection seats designed to fix that by boosting the ejectee way up high, (1) not so much fun if your craft is not pointing the right way (i.e., up), (2) also no picnic if they fracture your back or neck.

Wonder what insurance will cost?

party pooper!

[lookin]

party pooper!

That too. I don't see anything that looks like a commode in there.

[RA1]

Cirrus, a general aviation aircraft manufacturer, has a whole ship parachute as standard equipment. Sounds like a wonderful solution and Cirrus has gained a good market share for that and other reasons BUT they have had a lot of problems with the system. It ordinarily works but will damage the airframe extensively. OK, your neck or the airframe is no choice and that is correct. However, the system has not been used appropriately in all too many cases when it was deployed. Some waited too long and there was not enough altitude or too much airspeed for the parachute to work properly. That is called being outside the envelope. Other times there was no need to deploy the 'chute and the airframe was needlessly severely damaged. Other times the chute was not deployed when clearly it would have helped aka been a life saver. At the moment, the Cirrus aircraft have a worse safety record than the average general aviation population. The factory is trying to correct that statistic with better training. Better and more training has been the mantra of the FAA from day one with limited success. Either you pay attention or you don't. Ditto for the military and the airlines.

Martin-Baker and others make "zero-aero" ejection seats. That means the pilot or pilots can "safely" eject at zero airspeed and zero altitude. The seat has a rocket motor that flings the occupants and their seat upward to give the parachute a chance to operate as advertised. Just don't try this in a hangar.

So far as is known, no pilot has refused to eject when the situation warranted even though they knew they would be injured during. Spine compression and a broken limb are usually the least of the injuries. Broken collarbones and worse are generally the maximum injuries. However, it is fairly easy to imagine some scenarios where even the 0-0 seat is outside the envelope. Think about being upside down and close to the ground. Think about going Mach 2. Etc.

Automatic systems and parachutes are certainly no panacea. They are only possibly useful tools to help the thinking and trained pilot. How much training will be involved with flying cars?

Best regards,

RA1

[JKane]

Obviously the flying car thread topic is fantasy we won't be seeing anytime soon, but your insight into the Cirrus parachute is interesting.

I'm familiar with them and was figuring there'd be people who insist on trying to save the aircraft and refuse to pull... but it sounds like it's even worse than that. Giving people a choice complicates matters. Also, there seem to be several flight schools that use Cirrus aircraft, which probably ups their accident numbers over what it would otherwise be... There's one in Vegas I really want to visit one of these days and fly one for myself. Or win the lottery...

Has general aviation had the same massive swing towards safety that commercial aviation has? Is the most accident prone of today still much, much safer than the average say 15 years ago?

[RA1]

The US airlines have a pretty amazing safety record. In the last several years they have tended to run along with a minor mishap here and there and then, every year or two or three, have a fatal crash that kills a lot of folks at once. General aviation has made gradual improvements over roughly the same period but no one knows for sure which is the most influential aspect among fewer hours being flown because of the economy, the high price of fuel reducing the hours flown, better airframes and slight engine improvements, much better avionics (there is absolutely no reason to be lost these days) and some better training.

However, general aviation pilots who mainly fly for recreation seem to make the same old mistakes year after year. They stretch their fuel until the engine quits, they fly into weather that neither they nor their aircraft are equipped to handle, they don't fly enough to maintain proficiency and generally don't pay attention and sometimes have a bad attitude. Any one of those things can be dangerous. Two or more can be downright fatal.

OTOH, GA pilots are generally pretty bright folks who make more money than the average. It takes real dedication and perseverance to become a pilot BUT if the day you become a licensed pilot is the day you are the most aware and the best trained you will ever be, you may be in trouble unless you limit your flying to a pretty Sunday afternoon once in a while and don't actually go anywhere. Your license is merely and actually only a license to learn and practice. The gap between that point and professional pilots is wide and deep. Amateurs can be successful pilots; they just need to have a good attitude and pay attention.

Best regards,

RA1