Slashdot Mirror

The flying car joke is even better as Davis has such a company: Moller International.

Imagine putting one of these in your garage. If the ground traffic is at a standstill, then take to the the third dimension and rise into the air!

It's tethered, but... http://www.moller.com/medi.htm#

I'm not saying that Moller isn't something of a crackpot, and I suspect that he makes just enough progress to keep the investments rolling in without having to actually produce something viable on an automotive lot. However, he is making progress, and there may be a market for the vehicles if they work even half as well as he touts.

Still no flying cars.

The Airbus is on the list but not the flying car? Moller's Skycar has been 2 years away from completed testing for the past 10+ years and has been in development for somewhere around 40 years. If any aircraft deserves to be on the list, it's that one.

I'm still waiting for my flying car

http://www.moller.com/

Only if they're finally willing to bring the Moller Skycar into mass production and a reasonable price range. Of course, several other posters have said why not: The American Legal System, Civil complaints division, is so illogical that if 2999 lives were saved, but one lost, we'd rather take the tech completely off the market.

Slow news day, eh guys?

They're right here! http://moller.com/ But that doesn't mean they're for everyone...nor perfect yet...

Right here.

Come Real Soon Now to a dealer near you.

A flying car would have to use more energy, hence fuel of course, and cost an insane amount of money to fly.

No more than two years from now.
I mean, now...
Err, now?

eh? that's pretty much the goal of the skycar people. As well as FAA/NASA studies into dramatically increasing the capacity of air-traffic control. Small planes WILL replace large commercial airliners eventually, if only for the convenience factor. It's just a matter of time, engineering, and money.

We obviously have a hub & spoke system at the moment, the economic change to switched requires the hub and spoke system to become more expensive or switched transport to become less expensive. Hub & spoke is very expensive as it is, airports are expensive and large jets are also expensive. For that matter, trains are expensive, stations are expensive and rail lines are also very expensive. The additional security concerns will add to those costs.

Switched transport though has to become cheaper. At the moment it's limited primarily by the cost of the vehicle and cost of pilot/driver. The solution is to get rid of the pilot/driver entirely and to mass produce the vehicle to reduce the per unit cost. Frankly this means something like a fully automated Moller aircar or CarterCopter for air transport and Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) for ground based transport.

You think this guy or Moller will get a production model into a dealership first?

Nuclear-powered aircraft. - Humans have flight technology and use it; humans have nuclear power tech and use it (well, outside the US, anyway). Combining the two into one doesn't result in a different technology any more than combining a mouse click and a book purchase (like Amazon's "one click" patent).

Flying cars. The word for flying car is "airplane". Or if you prefer, hovercraft...or helicopter. But if you want something that *looks* like a car but flies, try this: http://www.afaco.com/ or this: http://www.volanteaircraft.com/ or this: http://www.moller.com/ or for something small and jet powered, try this: http://aviationtrivia.homestead.com/BD5J.html (I've seen this in an airshow - it's amazing)
Well, I think you get the idea.

Project Orion. - "Capable of" can include "economically and politically" as well as engineering. However, I would point out that Project Orion was a proposal based quite deliberately on *existing* technologies. That is, humans have already built (and regrettably, used) every component required to make Orion fly, we just haven't put them together. However, there is some question about the engineering required to shield, absorb impact, and not ablate, the thrust from Orion's nuclear bomb "engine"

Mach 3 aircraft with real payload, e.g. the XB-70. "With real payload" is merely engineering existing technologies into new forms. Mach 3 has been achieved, and by several aircraft. Just because it hasn't been engineered into a giraffe shape that flies upside down doesn't mean it's a "technology humans have refrained from".

Fiber to the home. Like the Mach 3 and Orion, the technology exists and is "not refrained from". Just cuz they didn't run it to *your* house ;) doesn't mean humanity as a whole has refrained from using the technology.

Betamax :-) OK, I'll give you this one.

It's impressive that they're doing this. Moewe has rather low wing area for the slow-speed maneuvering it does in Nausicaa, though. It's certainly possible to make a lively little aerobatic monoplane (the Sukhoi S-26 is one of the best modern ones), but those little wings imply a high stall speed. If you want hang-glider type stall speeds, you need more wing area or less weight. The classic solution for slow flight is the biplane. Take a look at this old Sperry Messenger, which has about the same wingspan as Moewe. The Messenger was a very maneuverable little plane. Sperry himself once landed one in front of the U.S. Capitol.

Moewe's tailless design creates a pitch stability problem from hell, but that's what flight-control computers are for. It's interesting to see what changes they made from the R/C model. The R/C model looks more like Moewe, with straight wings and a huge dihedral angle. The bigger towed model has a bent wing. They're trying for something that wants to fly straight and level.

There's much new interest in light aircraft today. The FAA has created a new category of "light sport planes", heavier than ultralights but lighter than general aviation aircraft, with less restrictive licensing. Take a look at this StingSport, which isn't much bigger than Moewe, even though it's a two-seater.

I expect the Open Sky crowd will build something that looks more or less like Moewe and flies reasonably well. And they'll do it long before Moller gets off the ground.

You can't talk flying cars without the obligatory Paul Moller reference!

Also, the cop car in Blade Runner could fly. Are you seriously saying we are 13 years from flying cars???

And yet, somehow, this guy still has investors lining up to dump money on his long running scam and these guys still seem to receive millions of dollars in venture capital, possibly from the Tooth Fairy who is at least as real as the product they have been hawking for the past four years.

I think you may be overestimating the intelligence of people who have money to invest. It seems that they are nowhere near as clever as we would like them to be.

Transportation is inarguably a major factor in boosting human productivity. I've lived in a lot of different countries, both developed and developing, and in the developing countries it is mobility and the capacity for transportation that blows open the doors to productivity - much more than computers or telecom, as far as I've seen. Transportation is definitely comparable in importance to water and power in terms of its fundamental impact on productivity.

http://www.moller.com/skycar/

What do I win?

Better get saving those pennies then.

Pesky practical problems always seem to get in the way don't they? Damn, if it weren't for those pesky pratical problems, we'd have flying cars. All the theoretical work has been done. Just a few bits and pieces to work out.

You are way off. This is a HUGE deal. That aside, take the amount of progress that was made in the 90's compared to this century, and its simply incredible. Its a snowball affect, and with the internet, the science is shared instantly for all scientists in the world. We are going to see lots of this stuff in practice in the next decade or so.

Well maybe not the holladeck, my guess is that will come to pass with nano paint/pictures/wall/etc., but your other list items will easily come "soon" (10-15 years). Even the flying car, I've seen some pretty cool demos, one that comes to mind is the Moller Skycar (http://www.moller.com/skycar/).

Remember the rate of progress increases each year.

He also thinks that almond butter is the key to life extension. Eccentric would be an understatement here. http://www.moller.com/about/history/lifeext/

The original Skycar was a disk, held aloft by pure exhaust. I'm not sure how he made the jump to the current design, the aerodynamics (if any) are completely different.

http://www.moller.com/skycar/m200x/

http://www.moller.com/news/pressrelease/SkycarInNM arcus2005.html

We have offered the prototype "for sale" in the catalog for $3.5 million on the condition that it be delivered after its inaugural piloted test flight scheduled for later this year or early 2006. Well, except that he notes elsewhere they really are "working towards" that day, and have NFI when it will actually happen.

Yep, it's "for sale"! Oh, but not the one in the photo! That's the shiny production version see.

You get the far uglier testing one shown here...

http://www.moller.com/skycar/ ... after they've finished with it. So the used up and probably modified-badly-between-tests, not-legal-to-fly, hopefully-not-crashed, uglier, prototype is your "for sale" "when it's done" (and we all know how well that's worked for Nukem Forever). For ONLY $3.5 million!

Yes, typical Muller all the way! What a visionary!

http://www.moller.com/news/pressrelease/SkycarInNM arcus2005.html

We have offered the prototype "for sale" in the catalog for $3.5 million on the condition that it be delivered after its inaugural piloted test flight scheduled for later this year or early 2006. Well, except that he notes elsewhere they really are "working towards" that day, and have NFI when it will actually happen.

Yep, it's "for sale"! Oh, but not the one in the photo! That's the shiny production version see.

You get the far uglier testing one shown here...

http://www.moller.com/skycar/ ... after they've finished with it. So the used up and probably modified-badly-between-tests, not-legal-to-fly, hopefully-not-crashed, uglier, prototype is your "for sale" "when it's done" (and we all know how well that's worked for Nukem Forever). For ONLY $3.5 million!

Yes, typical Muller all the way! What a visionary!

The problem I have with flying cars is that I am turning into a grumpy old man as I get older, and am sick of the noise caused by cars and airplanes. I'd like to move out to the country somewhere and be away from that noise. But if flying cars can just zip on over my property, i'd have less privacy and freedom from noise.

Maybe if special 'skyways' were created and that my serene castle in the country was far from it, I might be happy. But I doubt that will happen.

I think you mean this!
 
Get's better milage than your SUV as well.

they're right here :-)

Molar

Ok this one is pretty bad-ass. WIth the exception of half-million price tag, I would get this. Now we just need the FAA to approve it.

http://www.moller.com/skycar/
http://www.volanteaircraft.com/

Just google "flying car" :)

http://www.moller.com/ Check the FAQ section for the M400 model.

Here's the website for the "new" iteration of this idea. It looks promising.

I ate them. Tasty. But really, does the Moller Skycar whet your appetite? Next up, solar/linux powered flying cars.

A link. To one of the many flying cars we won't have. (thing's been "four years from production" for something like forty years now) http://www.moller.com/

I think this is what you want

The future isnt that far off, you just need to know where to look.

Actually, considering it costs more to buy a nice prius than it does to put in one hell of a solar system or windmill, I'd say you're doing more for the environment AND your pocketbook by putting in alternative energy at home. Maybe you can even sell some of it to your neighbor, too. Though that's probably just as illegal as my first suggestion, even though it'd be a Good Thing for all parties involved (minus the coal-burning power plant down the road).

Where I live, here in Queensland, if you want to generate electricity at your home, all you need to do is buy some little box and get an electrician to connect your generator - solar, wind, hydro maybe - through the box into the grid through your meter.

Then you let the power company know about it so their guy checking the meter doesn't look at the power box funny when it's measuring backwards.

There's a few people in Brisbane, one on tv a while ago, who have this set up with solar panels on their roofs. They quite often get a cheque from Energex - the power company - instead of a bill because they generate more power than they use - using more at night but generating heaps during the day while the kids are at school and both parents are working.

Personally, I'd like to own several different types of vehicle. I look at hovercraft's and think "that'd be fun" and occasionally visit the Skycar web page to see how the M400 is coming along.

But I think for me, for maximum in ease of control, stability, MPG (or KPL), and long term endurance, I'd be best with a horse. :)

The control's easy and I ain't going to be riding that thing into a post if I do something stupid like ride drunk, I'm a freak in the sense I find a horse's back comfortable to sit on, it refuels as it goes along sometimes (but I'm never in a big hurry, planning on being early all the time), and if I have two, I have grow a new one later.

Until we get nanobots, cars are gonna be a bit more difficult in those regards.

http://www.moller.com/skycar

The futurists all argue, "well, SOME day it'll be practical". Wasn't this the same group that predicted we'd have, ten years ago, flying cars, transporters, faster than light travel, etc?

We have flying cars, they just aren't very practical or popular yet. A warp drive is in hypothethical concept phase.

here you go.

The coolest looking one was the SkyCar, so I looked up more information.

No idea how reliable these are:

Paul Moller and his flying car

His 1974 flying car looked pretty cool, too, from a 1974 perspective. I could see wanting one of those as a teen-ager in the seventies.

Artful Dodger, with Eyes on the Prize

From the Popular Science article:

Buyer beware. In 2003 the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed suit against Moller International in federal court for selling unregistered securities. The suit alleged that while Moller, who has been designing and building vertical-lift vehicles since the early 1960s, had touted the Skycar's promise to investors, "in reality, the Skycar was and still is a very early developmental-stage prototype that has no meaningful flight testing, proof of aeronautical feasibility, or proven commercial viability." The SEC also alleged that Moller misled investors about the firm's financial prospects. Moller paid $50,000 to settle the suit.

To their credit, Moller doesn't seem to be trying to hide that in their company history.

I'd love this to be legit, just thirty years late.

Actually, it's Almonds

Either way, the guy is obviously quite nuts.

Actually, Moller's website gives some guaranteed performance specifications for a pre-ordered aircar. This includes a "best mileage" of approximately 20 mpg, which is not much worse than the 1997 Subaru Outback I currently drive, or any other mid-range car.

He guarantees this figure, along with FAA certification by the end of 2006, or you get a full refund of your deposit. Doesn't seem like a bad deal.

4.11. How suited is the Skycar to taxiing and does it require special roads?
It will taxi; however, it was engineered for ground travel only as is required to travel from your home to its point of take-off and back. The top ground speed will be 30-35 miles per hour. It does not require special roads.

4.12. Are there limitations to using the Skycar for ground travel?
The M400 was engineered to meet the size and other requirements set forth by the DOT and will be "street legal" primarily because it can be treated under the same category as a three-wheeled motorcycle. It should be noted that Skycar was developed for short distance ground travel at low speeds as a means to conveniently transport it from storage locations to approved take-off locations and back.

4.28 How is the Skycar powered on the ground? Does it use thrust from the nacelles or do the wheels have a direct drive of some kind?
Current plans call for one engine to provide electrical power to motors in the drive wheels. Alternatively, one engine could provide sufficient thrust for ground propulsion as a backup to the electric drive.

http://www.moller.com/images/large_news.gif">Hea dline at Moller's 'skycar' site.

Does anyone smell a patent suit?

And no one has mentioned harnessing the power of the "deadly downwind turn", my own invention!

The air scooter is an ultralight, not a "car". That's a pretty big difference. Move on there's nothing to see here. The flying car still hasn't arrived. When it does you will likely be able to credit this guy.