Slashdot Mirror


"Roadable Aircraft" Moving Towards Launch

We discussed Terrafugia's plans for what they don't like to call a "flying car" — rather a "roadable aircraft" — last spring. The Boston Globe has an update on Massachusetts-based Terrafugia and its fight to get airborne in these parlous times. "The last serious attempt to bring a car-airplane hybrid to market was the Aerocar, in 1949. According to Carl Dietrich, chief executive of Terrafugia, that company built six prototypes. It needed 500 orders in order to gear up for mass production, but it never got there... 'It can be hard to explain the value of this to non-pilots,' Dietrich says, 'but when you're a pilot, the problems of high costs, limited mobility on the ground, and weather sensitivity are in your face, all the time.' The company says more than 50 of the vehicles have been pre-ordered. The target price is $198,000."

11 of 186 comments (clear)

  1. Uses by man_ls · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I assume that the target market for this type of vehicle isn't the lay driver who wants a "flying car" to dodge traffic and be cool, it's the private pilot who wants to be able to fly somewhere and not have to worry about ground transportation at the receiving end.

    If I were a pilot, that's what would keep me from actually using a small plane to get around -- because unless my business was at the airport, I'd be stuck.

    1. Re:Uses by Original+Replica · · Score: 1, Insightful

      this type of vehicle isn't the lay driver who wants a "flying car" to dodge traffic and be cool

      I should hope that anything that flys, regardless of how popular it becomes, still requires a pilots license and that the skill needed to attain such a license remain quite high. Lay drivers manage to kill 43,443 people in 2007. I don't want to see what the statistics would be if people were text, putting on makeup, eating, yelling at the kids in the backseat, playing with the radio, fighting off sleep, etc. while flying a plane. Sure, there is more open space in the sky than on the road, but with how many drivers act that's just giving them more rope to hang themselves with.

      Fuel economy of airplanes vs ground transport is another rant entirely.

      --
      We are all just people.
    2. Re:Uses by ngg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      1: how much extra will a roadable airplane cost compared to a normal one?

      The people who want to build the aircraft mentioned in TFA plan to sell it for about $200k. A used, but very serviceable, two seat "regular" airplane can be bought for around $20k to $30k and a four-place for about $40k to $50k. So, the roadable airplane seems to cost between 4x and 10x as much as a normal one. And, if having a new airplane is important to you, you could spend $120k for a brand new Cessna Skycatcher, which comes from a company with an established track record of building reliable airplanes--and doing it profitably, which means that spare parts will continue to be available for many decades that well-maintained airplanes last.

      For the price of a new roadable airplane, you could buy a used normal plane and have enough left over for a few luxury cars (or a whole fleet of Civics/Fits/Corollas/Yarii) to park at your most frequent destinations. Consider also that a normal airplane, because it doesn't need to make so many compromises, will be better at being an airplane than this roadable plane will. And the same goes for the normal car being a car.

    3. Re:Uses by AB3A · · Score: 2, Insightful

      PP-ASEL-IA too.

      If you're seriously thinking about a powered parachute, you should know that they typically get a top speed of about 31 MPH and a stall speed of about 29 MPH. There is not a lot in between. You wouldn't want to fly something like this in anything more than a light breeze.

      You ought to take a look at terrain and airspace. A quick reminder: you're not allowed to conduct operations under Part 103 over urban areas.

      I would think long and hard before considering the use of any ultra-light aircraft for commuting. However, I have heard of some people who commute every day in small two seat aircraft. Air traffic control knows who they are and they usually have a squawk code and a friendly good morning waiting for them as soon as they're off the ground.

      But at a distance of only seven miles, I don't understand why you aren't using a bicycle.

      --
      Nearly fifty percent of all graduates come from the bottom half of the class!
    4. Re:Uses by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How many rental-car miles can you get for $80,000? Realistically, most people fly frequently to a small handful of locations, where they should probably enter into a car co-op with some other people, and share one of those econoboxes, and pick up the rest of the slack with rentals.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  2. Air Traffic Control is like Appletalk by Gothmolly · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Carrier Sense, Multiple Access, Collision Avoidance. Sadly, the roads, and soon (?) the skies might be filled with mouthbreathers who operate on the Ethernet (Carrier Sense, Multiple Access, Collision Detection) model. Who the hell would ever insure on of these? Lloyd's of London ?

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  3. Alternative by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    An integrated, detachable motorbike would probably be more useful.

    --
    Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
  4. What about fuel costs? by Joce640k · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Given the price of fuel needed to keep a machine in the air, I doubt anybody who can afford to fly to work every day will worry about airport fees.

    --
    No sig today...
  5. Changing Lanes by j_kenpo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Maybe its just me, but it looks like changing lanes must be a bitch in this thing. The foldable wings are huge obstructions to both the driver and the teeny tiny side mirrors. Of course, I haven't sat in one, so I don't exactly have first hand experience.

  6. Re:EXORBITANT? by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because while being covered with dimples may work well for a golf ball, they do considerably less aerodynamic good when applied to an airplane by a passing hail storm.

    --
    If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
  7. Re:Nice idea, but there are 1 or 2 problems... by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well I agree with your general point, that you would want to thoroughly inspect anything that had been "bumped" by another vehicle. But your wording was vastly more general than that. I've seen aircraft being flown immediately after getting whacked with small personal items, and even after taking out a runway light. If you bump it with your car then you should probably have it looked at by a professional, but there's a lot of stuff that can graze your plane without really creating the need for an inspection.

    --
    If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.