'Flying Saucers' to Go On Sale Soon

gihan_ripper writes "Perhaps the ultimate nerd acquisition, the flying car, is to go on sale in a few months. Speaking to the BBC, the inventor Dr Paul Moller described his creation, dubbed the Flying Saucer, as a VTOL aircraft designed to hover at 10 ft. above the ground. The flying saucer has eight engines and is expected to sell for $90,000. Dr Moller expects to produce a successor within six years, a 'Skycar' capable of a climb rate of 6000 ft./min. and an airspeed of 400 mph."

Comments

I'm already dead

[networkBoy]

from holding my breath

Re:I'm already dead

[GooberToo]

Dr Moller expects to produce a successor within six years, a 'Skycar' capable of a climb rate of 6000 ft./min. and an airspeed of 400 mph.

To put this in perspective, an Apache Longbow with 2400HP and empty except for fuel, at sea level, *might* see 4000 ft/min; and this thing is designed for operation in the vertical. From a power to weight ratio, Moller has nothin even close to what an Apache can produce. As usual, he's full of BS. Heck, most light GA, piston aircraft are lucky to see 1000ft/min, especially once you get a couple thousand feet above sea level. Granted, most light GA doesn't have vertical thrust but my point is, he is simply not working in reality unless he knows about some super secret advancements in engine technology.

from holding my breath

Agreed. Make room because you're about to have a room full of dead bodies from everyone else holding their breath.

Back to the future 2!!

[LaZZaR]

Strange thing is, the other day I was thinking about Back to the Future 2, how all those years ago the writers thought we might all have flying cars in 2015, and how off the mark they were. Looks like they were right after all!

Re:Back to the future 2!!

[Mex]

Don't be fooled. This Moller person pops up every year on Slashdot and other websites touting his machine, with the same 10 second clips of a "flying car". Add me to the list of people who will "Believe it when I see it".

I post this because I remember this exact same person being promoted here on slashdot at least 3 years ago.

Re:Back to the future 2!!

[mcrbids]

Hey, we just might get our flying cars. But they won't be coming from this guy. (See below for the bazillion posts of SCAM SCAM SCAM - this guy's been at it for years.

But there is a ray of light on the horizon, in the form of a real, honest-to-gosh flying car.

As a private pilot, I'm so hoping so hoping so hoping that this one actually works out! Light plane aviation has a number of problems:

1) Getting from your house to the plane is a hassle - the plane's at an airport, you have to park your car, leaving your car for very long can be expensive, you need a ride in a cab, etc.

2) Weather is a BIATCH. You plan a flight a week in advance, and then you get thunderstorms hitting right where you wanted to land. Small planes don't do nearly as well as the big jets in bad weather.

3) Hassle at the other end: Once you've landed, you're more or less stuck without a rental car. And in many smaller airports, that's a pain. Rental car agencies will deliver a rental car, but that doesn't make much sense when the nearest rental is 45 minutes away.

4) Parking - who wants to pay hundreds of dollars a month for what amounts to a garage that happens to be next to the tarmac at the airport?

The MIT "folding wings" car would solve all these problems:

1) Drive it to the airport.

2) If the weather gets too bad to fly, land at the nearest airport and drive the rest of the way.

3) Once you've landed, you fold wings and drive to your destination on surface streets.

4) At home, you park it in your garage!

All this for about $100,000?!?!?! Hell yes I'd buy one!

at least 20 years old

[Dusthead Jr.]

I saw this and previous veriations on this way back in 1987 on a tech show called Beyond 2000. 20 years later and still a prototype.

Re:at least 20 years old

[russellh]

I saw this and previous veriations on this way back in 1987 on a tech show called Beyond 2000. 20 years later and still a prototype.

I remember it. Was it not called the merlin then? I remember reading about it in some popsci rag in 1989 or so. My dad worked at a research lab in fuels and combustion in those days and his colleagues didn't believe the power to weight ratio claims for the engines. I so wanted to believe though.

With Moller...

[Merk]

I'll believe it when I can actually buy one. Much as I'd like a flying car, his always seem to be "Real Soon Now(TM)" AFAIK, Moller has never actually had anything for sale. Downside(R) lists his company as a scam because it has been a few years from production for 30 years. There have also been SEC complaints for "fraudulent, unregistered offering and the filing of a fraudulent Form 10-SB by Moller International, Inc. ("MI" or "the company"), a California company engaged in the development of a personal aircraft known as "the Skycar.""

I'd like to be wrong, but I sure won't be putting down any money just yet.

Re:With Moller...

[edwardpickman]

I wondered back in the 80s if he was for real or a scam artist but I have no doubt he's for real. He has spent a fortune of his own money and there has been a lot of development. The car has two major problems. First it's nearly impossible to do what he's trying but it looks like he finally has a nearly functional one so scam is a mighty strong word. The second issue is the odds are near zero of the FAA approving them anytime in the near future. They can't even get the insurance company to allow them to test it without the tether. From what I gather he's 95% there having a working prototype but they are on the razor edge of loosing it all. Releasing the saucer version was a desperate act to keep the company a float and legitimate. I have serious doubts of the skycar ever being approved for the average citizen. That doesn't make Moller a scam artist it makes him a dreamer. Sadly he may be shooting himself in the foot. All it takes is one moron doing something stupid in one of the saucers and the lawyers will eat his company for lunch. "Gee you didn't specially tell me flying a surface effect vehicle off a clift was a bad idea, give me money." Really it's a hovercraft that can fly 10' instead of 6". Cool but the potential for disaster is high. My fear would be wind flipping one. 10' is still enough head first to kill you.

History repeats itself..

[aero2600-5]

While I agree with all the skeptics, having read about this same damn car years ago, some of the skepticism is unfounded.

Moller may never produce a 'flying car', but someone will eventually.

When that flying car hits the market, it will likely be little different than when the first automobiles we're being sold. There were no parking spots in front of the general store, only places to tie up your horse. As more of these are sold, more spots to park them will become available. More gasoline/diesel stations will accommodate them as well. It will be slow. There won't be any real regulation of them for a while, but that won't stop people from using them. And these will likely be flying deathtraps for a while. So was the car for the first two decades of it's life. Same for the train when we started laying tracks everywhere we could find a place for them but couldn't design brakes worth a shit. As dangerous as these flying cars may be, people will fly them.

If I could afford one, I would buy it to fly it to work everyday. It would be easy for me; I'd just follow the river. The first automobiles were not utilities, they were novelties, just like the flying car will be when someone eventually manages to start selling them.

Aero