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/
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
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*
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!)
MPG?
38 mpg on the road, 21 mpg in the air (calculated). I pulled stats from the chart here: googleusercontent.com
But, according to the newer page here: pal-v.com, we have 28 mpg on the ground and about 12 mpg in the air (calculated).
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
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...
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
Hardest part wasn't getting the car to fly, but finding an actual maiden...
They will have to call it the NTSC-M One, of course!
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?
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."
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!
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!