Slashdot Mirror
Flying Car Makes Successful Maiden Flight
MistrX writes "The Dutch company PAL-V completed its first series of test flights with its flying car, the PAL-V One, successfully. The PAL-V One flies like a gyrocopter, with a minimal runway length of 165 meters, and drives around like a trike on the road. Furthermore it offers 2 passengers a maximum speed of 180km/h both on land and in the air. The company aims with the PAL-V One at usage within the United States, China, the United Kingdom, Germany and France, because private flying is more commonplace."
A roadable aircraft. A flying car needs VTOL capability.
And until it's legal to take off and land anywhere, even a true flying car could still only be used like a roadable aircraft.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
As the linked article is basically a wall of text, here's the website which has a video of the maiden flight on the front page:
http://pal-v.com/
Because we need gas hogs now more than ever.
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
http://pal-v.com/
I'm not flying or driving in that thing.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
In that case slashdotters could fuel it for a trip to Andromeda.
"completed it's first series of test flights with it's flying car"
"completed it is first series of test flights with it is flying car"
Really? WHERE did you learn that? STOP IT!
Now all someone has to do is invent drivers who aren't complete morons and we'll be in business!
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
We're officially in the future now.
--
the mechanical inspections for this thing if they want this contraption to be commonplace. I can see industry using it but yah you really want to leave it parked on the side street, nothing could go wrong with that mid air.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Do proofreed the submissions.
I was running out of reasons to not go outside.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Apparently it is a 10 minute process to convert from road to flying mode. You'll need a team to keep the cop at bay until you can take off, assuming you have about 540 feet available for the take off roll.
... oh right! The gyrocaptain in Road Warrior. It's nothing more than a glorified autogyro that looks like an old helicopter and a road going trike mated and had offspring.
Furthermore judging by the lack of bumpers, the non-adjustable tail, and probably a few other things I'm missing, it would never qualify as a road going vehicle in the US, and probably most of Europe, and odds are the tail would be damaged in most urban settings, which, if sold to less than overqualified pilots, would probably result in someone accidentally backing it into a wall, post, etc, and then assuming it doesn't have any damage because 'it was still all together!', will die spectacularly in a crash after their tail shatters due to physical impacts against it's CFRP(Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic) rear control surfaces. Additionally, as someone else mentioned: What's it's fuel economy look like? While it's an autogyro and thus should have reasonably good fuel economy, the engine design could have a dramatic effect on that, and even more importantly: what is the lifetime of the bearings and other parts in the rotor assembly? (And engine for that matter!)
Now all someone has to do is invent drivers who aren't complete morons and we'll be in business!
skynet, err, google is working on that
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
I've seen so many of these projects never get off of the ground, but this would be handy for travel to places too near to justify having your genitals felt up and scanned, then treated like a prisoner by gestapo sky waitresses. We need something that goes about 200 mph and hits most major cities. Of course TSA would get their Freudian, genital obsessed guards on the case if rail ever became too popular.
From the fine website, I cut and paste this WTF moment "A PAL-V ONE flies exactly like a gyrocopter, which is the easiest and safest way of flying."
To be polite, I will just say that opinion is not shared by the majority of aeronautical engineers who are not being paid to say it who know about "old style" autogyros. I'm just mister groundschool with a lot of simulator time and only a couple hours PIC and even I LOLed at that quote. I think they hired that "Baghdad Bob" the former Iraqi information minister for that line.
Autogyros are cool until the rotor stalls and you die, or the rotor seemingly inevitably cuts your head off in a crash landing, or ground resonance sets in and there's nothing you can do about it but die, PIO due to PPO (and possibly PPO is due to PIO?) and you die... There have been some improvements in design which may or may not prevent those control-theory problems, but the "giant rotating wing" cannot be replaced while still calling it a autogyro. Its like saying you could make a motorcycle safe to ride by merely completely enclosing it with windshields and doors, adding conventional seats with seatbelts and airbags, and adding a couple more wheels for enhanced stability, and ta da, a safe "motorcycle", although it not appears to be a Fiat Punto (which is actually a pretty nice small car, I've driven one a couple hundred miles in IRL).
The main problem with a "car autogyro" is likely to be chopping up pedestrians and bikers. Which is traditionally seen as "OK" when done by drivers, so maybe its not going to be so bad after all.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
All these new "flying cars" or "roadable aircraft" are utterly worthless until the day comes when one of them is fully capable of, at the push of a button, making the transition from car to aircraft and take off into the sky while actively driving down the highway.
I wish resources would be put towards more practical solutions to our traffic/road problems, like automated transit, ala many sci-fi movies like Minority Report and such. Flying cars will forever be niche and not a replacement for transportation for the general population.
How about a link to their website instead of a dumbass yahoo article without even a photo of the thing?
http://pal-v.com/
No sig today...
And like small aircraft, a majority of crashes will be due to miscalculating the amount of fuel needed.
Not another one!
Browse this list before you get too excited about this development.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_personal_aerial_vehicles
So I'm uninterested.
The problem is the design is a typical forward-trike. It may not be quite as bad as a Reliant Robin, but its going to be close to it on the road: When in doubt, it will roll, and roll easily.
Test your net with Netalyzr
Just another re-spinning of Molt Taylor's "Aerocar", albeit with the rather large "twist" of employing a rotary wing. Molt's stuff was revolutionary 50-some years ago, but not a commercial success. Modern materials and an auto-gyro aren't exactly ground-breaking. They certainly don't constitute the "flying car" I was promised. I predict another commercial failure.
The myth of the flying car is one of the prime examples of an undue sense of entitlement in Western culture. Any alleged problem these devices claim to solve are better served with more efficient mass transit running on alternative energy sources.
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
This is a three wheeled flying motorcycle or ATV. It would probably be street legal as it somewhere between a scooter and a motorcycle in size. The gyrocopter or autogyro concept is interesting. It should be pointed out that autogryos require expensive maintenance and inspection of the rotor blades and their linkages which are crucial for safe operation of the craft. The folding prop is also a potential source for expensive maintenance and inspection. An inflight failure of either of these systems would be instantly fatal in most cases. I would check out the safety records of other autogyros such as the famous 'Benson' before considering one of these. I do think it has potential as a sport personal aircraft, but not as serious transportation. BTW I have a private pilot's license and I think I would be comfortable flying an autogyro after a few hours of instruction in type.
Hardest part wasn't getting the car to fly, but finding an actual maiden...
I love the concept of flying cars, I think the world has had a love affair with the idea for almost hundred years. I can't help but think of the old TV shows about the "Home of the future" complete with your own flying car (of course it had a big plastic bubble on top). But it makes me cringe to think what it would be like if that actually happened, if owning one of these was affordable to the average citizen. I know quite a few people who don't take care of their vehicles, routinely run out of gas or have some other mechanical failure, or get in fender benders... and most of the time it's no big deal, you just roll to a stop. The difference with this vehicle is that those problems are now fatal.
Screw the flying car. Who really wants this? If it ever did go into mass production, it would be a disaster. How many times have you seen some moron on the side of the road because they've hit another car? Or simply run out of gas?
If you want to make a useful contribution to the auto industry related to making cars fly, then find a way to make then hover. Not 30 feet in the damn ait, just 1 or 2 feet. Enough to make tires, roads and bridges unnecessary.
Yes folks, I want hoverboard technology. Think of the money that could be saved if we didn't have to constantly repave roads or build bridges. All we'd need would be some markers/bouys to keep everyone in "lanes".
So, they make an article about a flying car, but don't include a single photo of it?!
http://pal-v.com/the-pal-v-one/styling-and-design/
I spent five minutes stealing cool sigs and all I got was this.
They will have to call it the NTSC-M One, of course!
Nice article. Not a single image of it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgHSaNtAMjs
But bump and runs can screw you over. Any aircraft that is in any kind of collision needs to be inspected for airworthiness, especially if it involves the engine or prop. You don't want to lose power at 1000m after all.
So the jerk who backs into you in the parking lot and drives away without a word could really screw you over. The article doesn't say much other than the rear prop folds up, so maybe it has a really good cage around that?
http://youtu.be/IsFfBB2W7IA
They still have three years to perfect it before Back to the Future lied to us.
This has all the vulnerability of a motorcycle on the road, and all the risks of a Jesus nut in the air. In short, the combined safety defects of the most dangerous forms of transport in their respective groups. All it needs now is submarine capability to create a perfect Bermuda Triangle. It is going to need to travel from locked garage to locked garage, because even gated suburbs don't have the security of an airport. It's a pity; the only way I can imagine a flying car safe enough for the public would require fixed wings, which obviously won't work.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Not even by the most wildest dreams. It's a road able aircraft that will have an impossible time getting govt approval to drive on the road.
Second, very few people will buy it, One nimrod in the parking lot backing into it and it loses it's airworthy certification.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
My, how the tech has advanced! You'd think a flying vehicle would be using lightweight alloys, not heavy metal.
180mph on the road in a top heavy trike? I sure hope it is more stable than that . Besides there is one serious flaw that plagues every flying car: they take drunk driving into a whole new dimension.
There have been many attempts to market a flying car over the years. The problem has never been whether it was technically feasible. The problem has been that, after cheering about the idea, people simply don't buy them.
I don't think I'll be picking up a replacement rotor at autozone any time soon...
I agree with your point that this is a bad idea, but would take it much farther by saying we get in plenty of fatal accidents on the ground. From drunk driving to other mischief to just plain bad luck. 2D is plenty dangerous. Adding a 3rd D to this mess would be a colossal #$&^ up, and not just on the road. Sitting at home having a nice lunch, when all of a sudden.....
Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.--Mark Twain
I'm reminded of Condor, the motorcycle with fold out helicopter blades, from the MASK series.
All these new "flying cars" or "roadable aircraft" are utterly worthless until the day comes when one of them is fully capable of, at the push of a button, making the transition from car to aircraft and take off into the sky while actively driving down the highway.
You've just got to be an American with that mind set. I'm surprised you included the requirement to 'push the button'. Wouldn't mind control be less work?
Exercise! It's what's before dinner.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Better hope you don't get hit by a gust of wind traveling at 180km/h on land.
Well, it looks kinda cool.
I know nothing about aircraft. How does one with a range of 200-300 miles or so and a top speed of 180km/h compare with other 2 seater aircraft?
... around my atomic-powered floating mansion and surprise my wife who is right now busy programming the positronic robot maid, duh!
Not if they are supplemented by a very good navigation system. It's kinda hard to run out of gas in mid-flight if the system forces you to land way before that happens.
I think this is possible if the "car" is completely automated. Which is not that far-fetched, considering the Google car and the fact that in mid-air there are much less obstacles, particularly peons.
Dilbert RSS feed
"routinely run out of gas or have some other mechanical failure"
One of the advantages of an autogyro based aircraft is that if the engine does fail (either a mechanical fault or gas/oil issue) the craft can almost always be powered to a relatively safe landing (a bit rough and possible minor damage to craft) with even basic knowledge. The only thing you really need to do is point your craft towards a safe area to land (field, empty road, etc) and keep your airspeed above stall (just keep the "collective" pitched somewhat down). A twelve year old with 5 minutes of training should be able to do it.
You mean I have to get out of the car to fly it? That's a baby's toy.
In Europe, it's illegal to take off from regular roads :)
They Rock!
But I'm really not a big fan of tzatziki sauce. What? It's a flying car? Not lunch? Well that's just stupid.
The Molnari Gryocycle street-legal gyrocopter motorcycle is way ahead!
Looks like an autogyro to me.
Not new.
Not a flying car.
That's a scary design for a gyro. The off-the-roof tail brings the center of gravity high and to the rear, which will naturally tilt the nose up, and if you bring the nose up, you're going to be rubbing the rear prop on the pavement because there's no guard to prevent it.
The really difficult challenges will the legal, not physical, problems.
Over here in Germany, for example, the category this type of aircraft falls into is by law not allowed to cross residential areas in low-altitude flight (I think that's under 300 m, but not sure on that detail). Which rules out any kind of takeoff or landing from the immediate vicinity of your home. If you need to drive to the airport, there's not much avoiding the traffic jams, is there?
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
In some states a 3 wheel configuration, even enclosed, is not considered a passenger car. You would have to (most cases WANT TO) wear a helmet.
But this would be cool to drop venomous snakes onto the freaks trying to steal our precious juice...
PAL-V went from design to fully-functional flying prototype and starting on certification in under four years, with little hype or PR.
Moller Skycar has been under development for over forty (yes, that's 40!) years and still no untethered flying prototypes, but lots of hype and PR surrounding the project, with many scheduled flight demonstrations cancelled.
As much as I want to believe that Moller is legit and the SkyCar is real, because of the boasted performance envelope and potential for IVR flight (plus the failure mode of wankel engines generally is just reduced power output, not catastrophic failure), practically everyone thinks Moller is trying to sell snake oil, bilking millions from investors.
Even though PAL-V looks like it will be strictly VFR (it looks like it would conform to the Light Sport Aircraft type), it looks like a winner because it is a real product.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
I notice that the FAQ omits the two questions I would expect to be most frequently asked: "What will it cost?" and "When can I buy one?" Call me when those two are answered. Until then it's just another concept vehicle that will never advance beyond the one-off prototype stage.
Chelloveck
I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
to better human civilization of course >>;
but all the other specs are about the same: Cessna 152 specs.
A 152 can take off in 500' and land in 100'. It's Vne is 110mph and it burns fuel at about the same rate.
As a driver or passenger in this Pal-V I would not want to be in a auto collision. They don't seem to offer much protection against hitting or being hit by other cars, and being as narrow and tall as it is I suspect that it would be vulnerable to tipping over due to later wind gusts.
I used a private pilot license as part of my consulting work. It is IMPERATIVE that one makes one hour of preparation for each hour of flight, in order to identify the height of every object along the intended flight path and all secondary paths, where the emergency landing airfields or other places are, and to compute flight envelope conditions as fuel weights change with distance for a given load. The pilot also has to determine the possible weather along his intended flight path as well. The FAA isn't very tolerant toward folks who get trapped into flying into sucker holes.
To not make these plans is to commit suicide. A pilot just doesn't hop into his plane and take off. There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are NO old, bold pilots.
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
It is not a flying car because it can't serve the same function as a car. A flying car needs to be able to do things a car can. Such as transport a family of four, groceries, and small packages. Because this can only carry a single person it would be better to describe it as a "Flying bike." If it could carry furniture then you could call it a "Flying truck"
Actually, if that ploy is used to avoid a speeding ticket, you leave yourself open to an even more costly FAA violation for flying too low.
Bunting over
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmOeMTUqp98
"flights with it's flying car" == "flights with it is flying car"
The video from the companies website, http://pal-v.com/, states that many attempts have been made to make flying cars. Looks like a lot of those attempts fly just fine. Guess they don't have access to wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_car_(aircraft) Terrafugia is one of the more modern flying car contenders: http://news.ninemsn.com.au/technology/8445752/flying-car-cleared-for-takeoff
I saw this as a rendering some years ago, thought it was brilliant as an idea , a Carver One with a Gyrocopter, but I thought it was way to fanciful and that they would never actually manage to pull it off, thought it would be just another Moller.
Well damn it, if they didn't go and build the thing.
I don't think I've ever wanted anything so much in my life as to own that.
NZ Electronics Enthusiasts: Check out my Trade Me Listings
I love the idea of having my own flying car. And PAL-V is a great technology demonstrator - they should keep at it.
That said, there's some basic safety and legal problems with flying cars that need to be addressed.
Safety: What happens when it breaks down? When your car has engine problems, you pull over and coast to a stop. In a personal aircraft you plunge to your death. Two engines seems like a solution, but expensive and bulky. And what happens when you lose a rotor blade/wing? I know that some small aircraft have parachutes that are supposed to save the entire plane, but they wouldn't have a chance to work if you're flying at 500 feet. Also, keep in mind that there's no such thing as a fender-bender at altitude, so traffic would no longer a simple aggravation. It would be a life-threatening hazard. And then there's all the distracted pilot/drivers, texting, shaving, applying makeup...
Legal: Ok, so the legal ramifications are really just an extension of automotive law, but with the caveat that the damages will be much higher, since there will be a much rate of loss of life. Flying cars crashing into each other, flying cars falling on houses/people, cleanup costs...
Maybe we should wait until we can have robots fly us there safely.
No way would I subject an aircraft to the hazards of the road, let alone city driving. They make a nice, expensive, conversation piece! It'd be nice to fly from one country road to another a few states over, but airport to airport and then drive it into town. Then of course try to get it back on the airport late in the day when it's not your home base and I'd love to have one, but not for the price and lack of utility. I currently have a 53 year old airplane that will get me from Michigan to Atlanta for lunch and back home for dinner but at 6 dollars a gallon for av gas it makes for a very expensive day. With 2 of us it's usually cheaper than the airlines and I can make that trip faster than going by the airlines even at less than half their speed. It's also for sale. On top of this, what about the air traffic system. In many parts of the country it'll cost at least 5 to 6 grand to get a pilots license. Most of these, if any would not fall under the sport pilot license and claims of eventually getting the price down is nothing but a pipe dream. Remember it's an airplane than must serve as a car. I don't see any way possible of selling them for less than the cost of an airplane. Actually I don't see any way of selling one for considerably more than a comparable airplane and you won't be flying them into Atlanta Hartsfield, Chicago Ohare, Detroit Metro, Washington, Or New York City and try to drive one on those fields any time of day. They claim eventual complete automation. That would be really expensive and the air traffic control system wouldn't be able to handle it (if they attempted it) for another 3 or 4 decades without a breakthrough.
Kind of disappointing that part of the conversion between car to airplane mode is done manually. Wonder why that is.