Flying Car Ready To Take Off

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by timothy on Sunday January 11, 2009 @11:42PM from the fill-up-on-windshield-fluid-please dept.

ChazeFroy writes "The first flying automobile, equally at home in the sky or on the road, is scheduled to take to the air next month. If it survives its first test flight, the Terrafugia Transition, which can transform itself from a two-seater road car to a plane in 15 seconds, is expected to land in showrooms in about 18 months' time. Terrafugia claims it will be able to fly up to 500 miles on a single tank of unleaded petrol at a cruising speed of 115mph. Even at $200,000 per automobile, they have already received 40 orders."

57 of 315 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Rules? by Godwin+O'Hitler · 2009-01-11 23:46 · Score: 5, Funny

Has anybody made an attempt at drafting traffic rules for flying cars yet?

--
No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
1. Re:Rules? by FiveLights · 2009-01-12 00:14 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Rules? Where we're going we don't need rules...
2. Re:Rules? by yabos · 2009-01-12 00:15 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  In the air they have to obey the same rules as other planes. On the ground they have to obey the same rules as other cars. Simple as that. Also to fly one of these things you need a private pilot's license so it's not like any yuppie with 200K is going to be able to fly it.
3. Re:Rules? by hitmark · 2009-01-12 00:33 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  wont stop them from trying tho, much like a lack of that pesky drivers license do not stop many from driving cars...
  
  --
  comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
4. Re:Rules? by yabos · 2009-01-12 00:39 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Maybe not but people don't seem to be stealing private aircraft very often. Maybe if this one was in your drive way it'd be more tempting to steal but it still looks like in order to fly it you have to unfold the wings by hand. It's not like James Bond where the wings fold out electrically and you fly away from the bad guys chasing you.
5. Re:Rules? by EdIII · 2009-01-12 00:40 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  In the air they have to obey the same rules as other planes. On the ground they have to obey the same rules as other cars. Simple as that.
  Either way I cannot wait for the first police chase involving one of these on the road. It will be fucking exciting, especially when the chase leaves the road . Better than Dukes of Hazzard on their best day :)
  That SOB is going to get TIVO'd.
6. Re:Rules? by phoenix321 · 2009-01-12 00:41 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Well, the rules above ground are drafted for professionals with thousands of logged hours. We can either require that for everyone who wants to fly or we can draft simpler rules in height-confined airspace. Maybe we already have, in VFR flight levels, I don't know.
7. Re:Rules? by troll8901 · 2009-01-12 00:46 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Year 2015, together with Mr Fusion reactors.
  Oh, if I remember correctly, upgrading a ground car to flight costs US$40,000 (this was a reasonably big amount when the movie was first released).
  Just remember, never appear in the middle of a lane traveling in the opposite direction!
8. Re:Rules? by TerranFury · 2009-01-12 01:05 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  It's not like James Bond where the wings fold out electrically
  Actually, from TFA, it is... The wings are actuated electromechanically; you just push a button in the cockpit.
9. Re:Rules? by Libertarian001 · 2009-01-12 01:14 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  From the website, one needs a Sport Plane certificate, which can be had in 20 hours. That's what scares me. I'm not sure on the timeframe for my fixed wing cousins, but must helicopter pilots solo, for the first time, at right around 20 hours. I've yet to meet someone that I'd be comfortable signing off to go on their own at 20 hours. Yes, I realize that the Sport Plane cert is pretty limiting. That's really not the point. No one looks at flying, and it's requirements, and says, "I'm going to hit those 20 or 40 hours and never fly again." They still want to continue on. And if that's the case, they may as well do it right and get at least their Private Pilot cert, and preferably continue on and get their Commercial cert. More knowledge and skill is a good thing.
10. Re:Rules? by KillerBob · 2009-01-12 01:15 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  ... You can get a private pilot's license, good for light aircraft and night flying, for about $5,000, with about 100 hours logged. Simulator time counts. It's really not that much of an impediment, and this thing will probably be small enough to count as a light aircraft.
  My real question is what kind of fuel it runs on. There aren't a lot of aircraft that'll run well on less than avgas, and avgas is very expensive. (The aircraft I trained on was a Diamond Eclipse, which *will* run on premium unleaded, but runs a lot better on avgas....)
  
  --
  If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
11. Re:Rules? by drinkypoo · 2009-01-12 01:25 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  There's really no correlation between financial success and intelligence. Those people in the rat race aren't happy anyway. Studies have shown that the American dream is a big fucking crock.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
12. Re:Rules? by areusche · 2009-01-12 01:40 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  The quick little article synopsis said unleaded petrol, which I am assuming is 94 unleaded gasoline!
13. Re:Rules? by Suzuran · 2009-01-12 01:57 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Actually, you don't need to hotwire an airplane. Just disconnect the grounding wires from the magnetos and turn the prop over by hand, and away she goes. The engine is electrically powered by its own rotation and does not need a battery and alternator to keep it running. To stop one, you have to ground out the magnetos or shut off the fuel supply. There is actually an item in the preflight checklists of most small aircraft to verify that the grounding switches still operate, otherwise you will have problems shutting down at your destination. (It's hard on the engine to kill it by starving it of fuel, and drains the carb float bowls which can complicate restarting.)
  This sounds unsafe, but this is by design - They didn't want an electrical fault to kill an engine. The radios and such will die without the battery, but as long as the engine has fuel and air, it will turn.
14. Re:Rules? by Gordonjcp · 2009-01-12 02:13 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  There is actually an item in the preflight checklists of most small aircraft to verify that the grounding switches still operate, otherwise you will have problems shutting down at your destination.
  It's not just that - you shut down each magneto in turn, so you can prove that both systems are working. Most piston aeromotive engines have two complete ignitions systems, with two magnetos and two sets of spark plugs. When you switch one off, then engine revs will drop a little. This way you can work out if a) the magneto is working, and b) the ignition switch is switching it off. If the revs don't drop, either that magneto isn't working or is staying on. If you switch the other one off and the revs drop, the first magneto isn't switching off. If you switch it off and the engine stops altogether, the first one wasn't working.
15. Re:Rules? by jsight · 2009-01-12 02:18 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  (It's hard on the engine to kill it by starving it of fuel, and drains the carb float bowls which can complicate restarting.)
  Not true at all, and in fact most light singles are shut down by pulling the mixture, which essentially does just that (starving it of fuel).
  
  --
  Throw the bums out!
16. Re:Rules? by jsight · 2009-01-12 02:22 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  You can get a private pilot's license, good for light aircraft and night flying, for about $5,000, with about 100 hours logged.
  Simulator time or not, 100 hrs @ $50/hr avg is going to be hard to come by. I think most folks end up closer to $7500/60 hrs.
  
  --
  Throw the bums out!
17. Re:Rules? by notaspunkymonkey · 2009-01-12 02:27 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  It is not the first flying car - check out this bad boy - it begins its journey from London to Tombouctou tomorrow! http://www.skycarexpedition.com/the_expedition.php
18. Re:Rules? by yabos · 2009-01-12 02:35 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  The Lycoming engines in the Cessna 152s and 172s I fly are shut off by pulling the mixture to idle cut off. I don't think this is a big deal for the engine since it's the recommended procedure by the Pilot's Operating Handbook for these planes. When starting it you usually prime 3 times which sprays fuel in the carburetor.
19. Re:Rules? by MikeBabcock · 2009-01-12 03:14 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Just wait for that call to your insurance company about a car in your living room ... in your 17th floor condo.
  
  --
  - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
20. Re:Rules? by powerlord · 2009-01-12 03:28 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Not to burst your bubble, but quite a lot of more rural places have small airfields with little checking.
  Some friends used to have one in back of their property that was shared by covenant between the 10 or 12 houses that shared the complex.
  Everyone pitched in to maintain the grass airstrip. They had a windsock at the end, no lights or instruments, and it was listed on local aviation charts (along with lots of other like-rated strips).
  Taking off in a plane wouldn't be the problem. Once you hit a high enough altitude, ATC will pick you up, that's when you'll start to have problem (unless you know what you're doing). Landing though is usually the part of flying that is the most difficult, even for a trained amateur, so I don't see "Joy flying" as being a big repeat sport (for the untrained).
  
  --
  This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
21. Re:Rules? by Sobrique · 2009-01-12 03:56 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Not to burst your bubble, but quite a lot of more rural places have small airfields with little checking.
  
  Even more places have roads that go approximately straight.
22. Re:Rules? by GooberToo · 2009-01-12 04:22 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  This sounds unsafe, but this is by design - They didn't want an electrical fault to kill an engine. The radios and such will die without the battery, but as long as the engine has fuel and air, it will turn.
  Ignoring the latest generation of light, single and twin piston aircraft which have dual electronic ignition, which do require a functioning power bus and battery.
  There is even an accident on record of a Diamond twin engine crashing immediately after take off because of dead batteries, despite it being diesel. The fuel pumps are electric (not sure if its actually mechanical with electric axillary or fully electric) along with the retractable gear. Seems retracting the gear was enough to deplete the batteries, causing the fuel pumps to turn off. This caused both engines to simultaneously quit.
  I would have provided a link to the NTSB accident report but the web site is currently unreachable for me.
23. Re:Rules? by wjsteele · 2009-01-12 05:59 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  That is incorrect. The mag check is used to determine that the primary ignition systems are firing all cylinders. In the event of a failure, the plane will still have a working ingition system to power the engine, though on a slightly reduced power level.
  
  We DO NOT use the switch to kill the engine at the destination, however. Instead, we pull the mixture to cut off the fuel flow to the engine. Starving the engine of fuel prevents the mag from firing any residual fuel left in the cylinder after engine shut off. If we don't, someone just walking by the front of the plane can move the prop and have it accidently fire up. That would not be a good situation and many people have been killed because of it.
  
  And yes, I am a pilot.
  
  Bill
  
  --
  It's my Sig and you can't have it. Mine! All Mine!
we will NOT have flying cars by Anonymous Coward · 2009-01-11 23:49 · Score: 5, Insightful

seriously. most people can barely control a car on the ground. or even keep one properly maintained.
and you want to put these folks into the air? over your house? yeah... i don't think so.
thats what you call a 'bad idea'.
cap:unguided
1. Re:we will NOT have flying cars by 4D6963 · 2009-01-12 00:15 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Yes we will have flying cars. Only they'll be nothing like a tiny airplane, and fully automated. Fully programmed VTOL is the only thing that would happened. May be a long shot, but we won't get anything short of that no matter what.
  
  --
  You just got troll'd!
2. Re:we will NOT have flying cars by MoonBuggy · 2009-01-12 00:20 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  There's a quick solution to that problem, and it doesn't even require any technical or legislative changes: don't call it a flying car!
  Even their website doesn't use the term 'car'; it's clearly marketed towards pilots not drivers and they call it a "Roadable Aircraft". It's being sold to people who already fly, but want to be able to get from door to door rather than airfield to airfield - an idea which makes sense to me.
3. Re:we will NOT have flying cars by should_be_linear · 2009-01-12 00:23 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I, for one, (not welcoming anybody) am dreaming of flying car that I can select my destination on some dialer a then let central computer take me there. I wouldn't put my family into flying car that I am supposed to fly. What they have is not flying car, it is airplane you can drive. Flying car should be, first of all *car* - something that Joe Sixpack can use easily in (relatively) safe way.
  
  --
  839*929
4. Re:we will NOT have flying cars by fprintf · 2009-01-12 00:47 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  For someone who can afford one of these flying cars, it is likely the cost barrier for a pilot's license does not exist. What is likely to exist, however, is the time barrier. Typically, unless cashed out, retired or otherwise not working, people that can afford this kind of luxury are working their asses of with very little free time.
  With that said, in the U.S. I there are new Sport Pilot licenses that might fit this usage perfectly. The licenses are much easier to obtain, with the associated training centers springing up, where a person can pay $X thousand and learn to fly in two weeks. For example, http://sportplanesflorida.com/learntofly.htm?gclid=CIeL79WHiZgCFSUqHgodKRniDg is what came up on my first google search.
  I read the new licenses only require 20 hours of flight time versus the current Solo rating 40 hours. If you fly 2 hours per day, which is a *lot*, then in 10 days you are done.
  
  --
  This post brought to you by your friendly neighborhood MBA.
5. Re:we will NOT have flying cars by Lumpy · 2009-01-12 01:02 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The moller skycar is not even a real prtotype, it's a vaporware fake demo.
  we will NOT have VTOL flying cars. Have you seen what a harrier does to pavement when it takes off or lands vertically? IT even blisters the hell out of super thick concrete. and no fan or turbofan in existence will do a decent VTOL without being 3X the size ofthe aircraft.
  Flying cars will NOT happen. The general public is far too stupid to own one, and you would have to put in safety systems that make the car refuse to move when periodic service is needed. Hell my old Piper Comanche needed it's wings replaced for every 1000 hours of flight, and that was nearly the fricking cost of the aircraft! (which is when I sold it.)
  
  --
  Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
6. Re:we will NOT have flying cars by Bucc5062 · 2009-01-12 01:15 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  The FAA requires a minimum of 40 hours for a PVT license. On average the training time is much longer. It took 63 hours to achieve my PVT rating. Flying has gotten more complex since the days when the government established the initial time limit. Not so much the actual flying, but the rules, and that instructors are teaching better judgment these days. That takes time.
  I think I'll wait till they automate a flying car into traffic before considering a purchase.
  
  --
  Life is a great ride, the vehicle doesn't matter
7. Re:we will NOT have flying cars by kannibal_klown · 2009-01-12 01:30 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Great,
  Now Farmer's Markets will have to equip Flak cannons.
Make sure... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-01-11 23:53 · Score: 2, Funny

Make sure not to hit the "transform back to car" button while you're in mid air.
this sorta thing has been done many times by wjh31 · 2009-01-11 23:55 · Score: 4, Funny

and while many of them have taken off, none of them have taken off
First is a little misleading by _Shad0w_ · 2009-01-11 23:58 · Score: 4, Informative

Calling it the first flying car is a bit misleading; there are quite a few pre-existing flying cars, it's just none of them was ever a commercial success. There's still an Aerocar about with an airworthiness certificate.
The main problem with a flying car is the number of certificates you need to get in order to be able to use it.

--
Yeah, I had a sig once; I got bored of it.
Re:Obligatory... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-01-12 00:01 · Score: 2, Insightful

I usually say this every time this comes up:
Putting stuff in the air is doable. Making an aircraft that can be piloted by you average citizen is quite another matter.
Car crashes can be quite bad as it is, but if you add a 1 km fall to every incident, the death toll would surely go up.
We would have to add steel plates to every roof to defend against distracted soccer moms raining down at terminal velocity.
It's Not a Flying Car by Cephacles · 2009-01-12 00:02 · Score: 3, Insightful

It's a driveable airplane. One key difference is it is marketed to licensed pilots.
I wonder how many airports are out there that have a path from the runway to the road that isn't fenced off or have some other barrier to getting this craft on the road.
1. Re:It's Not a Flying Car by Alarindris · 2009-01-12 00:07 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I would think they all would have a fairly easy way of getting out. Doesn't the mail go through regular passenger planes?
2. Re:It's Not a Flying Car by scharkalvin · 2009-01-12 00:48 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Actually that isn't a problem. There are many general aviation airports that rent hangar space to aircraft owners (in fact almost all airports do). You drive your car onto the airport and park right next to your hangar, get it your plane and take off. In this case you can taxi your airplane off the runway, onto the private airport road, then out of the airport. Remember this is a plane the size of a car with folded wings. No problem!
Roads do nasty things to vehicles by Viol8 · 2009-01-12 00:17 · Score: 4, Interesting

I wouldn't want to be around when one of these that has done 20,000 miles of potholes, salt, grit and all the other things you drive through on the road that mess up vehicles takes to the air because god knows what it would do to a light airframe over 10 or 20 years. Sure , you're supposed to do maintenance - but that doesn't prevent loads of cars breaking down at the side of the road due to lack of it. If people drive this like a car (even if they're qualified pilots) they may start to treat it like a car rather than like an aircraft and skip on servicing. The rest you can guess.
1. Re:Roads do nasty things to vehicles by Tx · 2009-01-12 00:42 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  If people drive this like a car (even if they're qualified pilots) they may start to treat it like a car rather than like an aircraft and skip on servicing. The rest you can guess.
  That's called evolution, baby! If you're the kind of person who's going to think "hey, that corrosion on the wing supports can wait 'till next year", and your still going to fly the thing, then you deserve what you get.
  
  --
  Oh no... it's the future.
2. Re:Roads do nasty things to vehicles by Viol8 · 2009-01-12 00:50 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  "That's called evolution, baby! If you're the kind of person who's going to think "hey, that corrosion on the wing supports can wait 'till next year", and your still going to fly the thing, then you deserve what you get."
  Yeah , but the people on the ground you land of top of don't.
3. Re:Roads do nasty things to vehicles by Lumpy · 2009-01-12 01:06 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  anyone that would drive a $200,000+ vehicle in the snow and salt is an idiot, and certainly not able to pass a pilots license requirement. That's the cool part, the pilot license requirement weeds out the idiots.
  
  --
  Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
4. Re:Roads do nasty things to vehicles by Rogerborg · 2009-01-12 01:29 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  The people on the ground are poor though, so who cares?
  
  --
  If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
5. Re:Roads do nasty things to vehicles by Thumper_SVX · 2009-01-12 01:55 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I can guarantee you that since this is a roadable aircraft and not a flying car, it will be subject to the same inspection and maintenance requirements as a light aircraft.
  Reality is, this thing is going to be expensive to own, but no more so than an average light aircraft *and* a car (since as you point out you'll have the same wear and tear as a car with a very rigorous maintenance schedule).
  There's a good reason light aircraft fly for 20 years or more; they need to be in order to maintain an airworthiness certificate. This vehicle will be no different.
6. Re:Roads do nasty things to vehicles by Joe+the+Lesser · 2009-01-12 04:32 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  So finally the upper class is a literal definition!
  
  --
  "I only speak the truth"
  Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
Re:This isn't a flying car... by QuantumG · 2009-01-12 00:33 · Score: 2, Interesting

This is not a flying car like the moller which envisioned VTOL from your driveway.
And that's probably a good thing. Why is it that everyone understands that you have to have an Atari 2600 before you can have a PS3 but, when it comes to the "flying car", they expect the future today.

--
How we know is more important than what we know.
Indeed. OTOH Here's a real transport revolution - by Colin+Smith · 2009-01-12 00:35 · Score: 2, Interesting

The first real PRT system is nearly ready to enter active service at Heathrow Airport.
http://www.atsltd.co.uk/news/29/32/First-Flight-at-Heathrow/d,News%20Display/

--
Deleted
It won't be most people by MikeRT · 2009-01-12 00:53 · Score: 2, Insightful

Ever heard of this thing called a "pilot license?" Yeah... "most people" neither have them nor an opportunity to get one, and they'll be required to operate one of these things.
1. Re:It won't be most people by darth+dickinson · 2009-01-12 05:19 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Unfortunately, since this thing could feasibly take off from any straight stretch of road, what's to stop the "I can fly MS Flight Sim, I can fly one of these" types from just finding a nice stretch of road and taking off?
  
  Of course, taking off and piloting are the (relatively) easy parts, so maybe the problem will take care of itself the first time they do an approach :)
Holy cow by Verteiron · 2009-01-12 00:56 · Score: 3, Interesting

I SAW one of these things on I-80, and spent some time with Google trying to figure out what the thing was. Unfortunately it was being towed, rather than driving under its own power, but still. The wings were folded up but there's no mistaking the shape of the thing.
Neat.

--
End of lesson. You may press the button.
Re:If these do become the norm by skiman1979 · 2009-01-12 01:07 · Score: 2, Insightful

Think of the poor airline pilots, who have 100's of lives on board, restricted lanes to travel in, air traffic control to help guide them....now having to watch out for lunatics in personal flying cars swooping across the front of their cockpits. It'd be an interesting new approach for a terrorist attack.
Isn't that what air brakes are for? :-P
I would imagine these flying cars would have their own low-altitude restricted space to fly in. If that's the case, they wouldn't be anywhere near commercial jets, except maybe during the jets' take-off and landing.
Wouldn't these things also be linked to air traffic control?

--
Having a smoking section in a public restaurant is like having a peeing section in a public swimming pool.
Coincidence? by Viceroy+Potatohead · 2009-01-12 01:50 · Score: 5, Funny

January: Obama becomes president.
One month later: Flying cars.

What's next?
Thanksgiving: Immortality.
Christmas: Girlfriend!

Clearly, all this fuss about Obama has been well placed! He's not even in power yet and the flying cars are already on the way! :P
Crashed.... by mrops · 2009-01-12 02:17 · Score: 5, Funny

Not sure about the car, but the website sure crashed!
Hope the car is better.
1. Re:Crashed.... by captain_dope_pants · 2009-01-12 05:38 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  SNAKES ON A CAR !
  
  --
  while (true != false) process_more_stupid_code();
Re:Obligatory... by Auraiken · 2009-01-12 02:18 · Score: 2, Insightful

Natural selection is only good when it doesn't have the ability to take out people not associated with the idiots who are going to die.
Re:Thankfully, you're wrong... by samkass · 2009-01-12 02:53 · Score: 4, Informative

Just to clarify, Private Pilots can fly in any VFR (Visual Flight Rules) airspace. With just the private pilot ticket (no further endorsements) you can fly a plane up to (but not including) 200hp, fixed gear, fixed single prop, below 18,000 feet, and a sufficient distance away from clouds to qualify for VFR. You need a current third-class medical and a bi-annual flight review and you're good to go with yourself and/or friends anywhere you want.
To traverse class B or C airspace you need a working radio and transponder in the plane and you need to obey the controller. In class D, G, or unclassified airspace you just need to not hit anything.
Also, these days I'm not aware of many weekend fliers who can get the license in 40 hours. To do that you pretty much need to go to a focused school and be on an airline pilot track. I'd say 50-60 hours is about average.

--
E pluribus unum