Could Flying Cars Actually Be On Their Way?

another random user writes "With ideas like the Taylor Aerocar, Terrafugia Transition, Terrafugia Transformer, the PAL-V, and myCopter, are we getting close to a point where flying cars could actually become practical? An article at the BBC discusses how adding automation to these craft is an important goal for the people currently working on them, something we see paralleled in the many projects to develop autonomous non-flying cars. 'The team intends to draw on drone technology to automate as much of the flying as possible. Current fly-by-wire technology, as well as some of the features being used in the development of autonomous or robotic vehicles could all help fleets of these vehicles fly along predefined highways – and crucially avoid each other. But perhaps the biggest problem the team aim to tackle are the regulatory and safety issues, as well as those of public opinion.' If that does happen, given a lot of drivers' inability to pay attention to what's going on around them on the roads as it is now, how safe would you feel in the air?"

Comments

In the air?

[Vekseid]

I'd like to continue feeling safe on the ground, thankyouverymuch.

Re:In the air?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or even better, high speed chases in the air.

That is at least 170% too awesome to ever become real.

Re:In the air?

[nschubach]

Speaking from a bit of experience... There's a big difference in flying something sitting in a cockpit and sitting in a lawn chair. It's much easier actually being in the vehicle you are controlling and having all your appendages instead of just two thumbs to control with.

Re:In the air?

[PopeRatzo]

I'd like to continue feeling safe on the ground, thankyouverymuch.

I feel plenty safe, air or ground, but I definitely wouldn't feel safe in the air surrounded by the people that are now filling the Dan Ryan Expressway every morning.

Me, I've got no problem with a flying car. It's having other people with flying cars that's the problem.

Re:In the air?

[Anonymous Coward]

Flying -- with the notable exception of lighter-than-air such as gasbags -- is too energy intensive to be consumer-level practical at this point in time. Leaving out the technological, mass production, and licensing hurdles.

Until or unless we can come up with inexpensive energy, it's not going to happen other than as a rich person's option.

Most people are intimidated by the amount it costs to *drive* somewhere. The cost of flying is like the cost of boating... much, much higher than driving.

Re:In the air?

[jbov]

I drive a pickup truck that seats six passengers. I can haul things, tow things, carry passengers, or load the rear of the cab with tools and boxes of cable. Would I like to drive a small, fuel efficient car when I am doing none of the aforementioned things? Sure. However, I can't afford to purchase and insure two vehicles. I think this is why people drive SUVs or trucks. If they can only afford one vehicle, then that vehicle better be able to take their family on vacation, carry their cargo, and pickup supplies at the home improvement store.

That is why you see so many married couples with families that have one car, and one SUV or extended cab pickup truck.

i hope never

[dmitrygr]

As a pilot, I really really really hope this never happens! Most people are BARELY able to keep in control of their vehicles in 2D, and are entirely unsuited for 3D. Keep them away from the skies, so that those of us who passed the difficult tests and demonstrated our ability to handle an aircraft safely can continue to be safe and remain not in danger of idiots cutting us off, not following rules, etc...

Re:i hope never

[JaredOfEuropa]

Meh... "real" bikers lament the increased popularity of motorcycles, and old school scuba nuts must hate PADI for making the underwater world accessible to all. I suppose it's only natural that pilots want the skies to themselves. Get off my lawn, but in 3D.

Still, one would hope that flying car pilots will have to pass the same rigorous difficulty tests, or keep their wheels firmly on the ground. And I think many will be unable to pass such a test. I agree with the article, and my money says flying cars will happen not before autonomous flight (including standard protocols for flight direction) becomes practical.

Good luck getting the fuel for it.

[eggstasy]

I thought the whole car thing was dying because we're running out of oil.
Can you build a UAV that carries a whole person AND a stack of lithium batteries?
Mass transit is still the way to go whether you're flying or not.
See, for instance, London's new Cable Car. I live in a hilly place and I can't for the life of me imagine why nobody thought it would be useful to simply go from hill to hill.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/modalpages/23828.aspx

Difficult technology mix

[joe_frisch]

Aircraft are technically marginal devices - minor increases in weight and drag have a significant effect on their overall performance. The compromises required to allow an aircraft to be used on the road will make it a really poor aircraft. If you read the performance information carefully on the Terrafuga, you will find that it is slow, doesn't carry much weight and has a very limited range.

People have come to expect a very high level of performance from their cars. The compromises required to make a car operate as an aircraft will make it a poor road vehicle.

The use case just isn't that compelling. Most of these vehicles will only be able to fly from airport to airport - which are often located in areas with large amounts of traffic. Once at the airport, the usual The pre-flight checks, and taxi / departure clearances will be required. The airplane / cars that have so far been exhibited are also not designed to deal with significant weather, or to operate over high terrain.

The existing model where you drive your (optimized) car to the airport and then fly your (optimized) airplane to its destination seems better. Rental cars are available at the general aviation terminals at many US airports, generally set up to minimize the time it takes to pick up and drop off.

No

[gweihir]

They are fundamentally problematic in several respects:

1. Piloting. Ordinary people cannot pilot anything flying safely.
2. Energy consumption. They just consume far too much with energy sources available today.
3. Landing and takeoff. You cannot do that just anywhere.
4. Air traffic control. They are already overloaded.
5. Unsuitable for roads. All designs so far have only very limited suitability as actual cars.

Unless all of these issues are solved at some point in the future, there will be no flying cars except demonstration stunts. Incidentally, anybody thinking about the issue rationally can come up with the above list easily. There seems to be a mental blockade a lot of otherwise intelligent people have with regard to flying cars.

Think further.

[trout007]

Imagine if you did have VTOL personal transports. You could eliminate roads. It would be like what is happening with cell phones eliminating land lines. You would save all of the money currently spent on maintaining infrastructure. Also sprawl would explode as people buy land without worrying about infrastructure. Land prices would plummet in most places.

If you think Amazon is fast now wait until you place an order and a VTOL drone drops off a package on your front door 10 minutes later.

It would be a VERY disruptive technology.

Could Flying Cars Actually Be On Their Way?

[mister2au]

Ummm ... no

Source: 40 years of "Could Flying Cars Actually Be On Their Way?" experience

Betteridge's Law

[Art3x]

No

Possible danger with flying cars

[Taco Cowboy]

Not only flying is too energy intensive, the concept of flying cars poses a HUGE RISK in this world we live in today, where there are people who are crazy enough to blow themselves up just so that people around them die with them

Imagine you have flying cars zipping around buildings - how are you to ensure that no one load up one (or more) flying car(s) with strong explosives and then slam it/them into an office building?
 

Re:Possible danger with flying cars

[BKX]

That's a bullshit argument. Substitute the words car and drive for flying car and fly and you'll see why. A terrorist could just as easily and with as much success load up a pedophile van with explosives and drive at 90mph into a building tomorrow. What difference does flying make?

Re:Possible danger with flying cars

[Jawnn]

It may be bullshit, but it's damned effective. We've allowed various versions of the "...then the terrorists win" argument to be used as reasons to repeatedly deprive us of our rights and liberties. You're quite right, of course. Timothy McVeigh showed us that any dim-witted sociopath can put together a car-bomb that will destroy an entire building, and you don't even have to "martyr" yourself in the process. That 24' Ryder truck holds a LOT more ANFO than your average flying car. Alas, GP has swallowed the bullshit whole and now lives in fear of airplanes.

Re:Possible danger with flying cars

[BeanThere]

Imagine you have flying cars zipping around buildings - how are you to ensure that no one load up one (or more) flying car(s) with strong explosives and then slam it/them into an office building?

Not to try inject "reason" between your shrieks of hysteria, but the risks are exactly the same as the current, existing ability of a terrorist to just drive right up to an office building with the same fucking explosives loaded in a damn ground vehicle. (How the hell did you get +4 insightful for that utter inanity?)

The reason it isn't common is because there just aren't that many people trying to blow you up, not because it's somehow currently just too difficult to blow people up.

No physical barriers for aircraft ...

[perpenso]

That's a bullshit argument. Substitute the words car and drive for flying car and fly and you'll see why. A terrorist could just as easily and with as much success load up a pedophile van with explosives and drive at 90mph into a building tomorrow. What difference does flying make?

If its an "important" building the van may crash into a barrier and not get "close enough" to the building to do significant damage. There are no barriers to keep aircraft away.

Re:Except you can physically block ground vehicles

[TheLink]

I'm not afraid of terrorists with flying cars. I'm afraid of the flying cars being controlled by the average driver or an AI that's only a bit better. Imagine thousands of 2 ton flying cars whizzing around at 100kph controlled by people texting each other etc.

Terrorists can already hit buildings from the air if they want to. They just have to use private planes. You can load those planes with bombs without anyone checking them.