Slashdot Mirror
Where are the Flying Cars? (Video; Part Two of Two)
Yesterday we ran Part One of this two-part video. This is part two. To recap yesterday's text introduction: Detroit recently hosted the North American Science Fiction Convention, drawing thousands of SF fans to see and hear a variety of talks on all sorts of topics. One of the biggest panels featured a discussion on perhaps the greatest technological disappointment of the past fifty years: Where are our d@%& flying cars? Panelists included author and database consultant Jonathan Stars, expert in Aeronautical Management and 20-year veteran of the Air Force Douglas Johnson, author and founder of the Artemis Project Ian Randal Strock, novelist Cindy A. Matthews, Fermilab physicist Bill Higgins, general manager of a nanotechnology company Dr. Charles Dezelah, and astrobiology expert Dr. Nicolle Zellner. As it turns out, the reality of situation is far less enticing than the dream -- but new technologies offer a glimmer of hope. (Alternate Video Link)
We have flying cars. They care called 'helicopters'. Widely used, widely available, you probably don't own and/or can't afford one.
As with so much of a certain genre of science fiction, the 'flying car' is more a fiction about how 'the future' would exist as though post WWII advances in the American middle class were going to continue following their upward trajectory all the way to personal flying cars 4 hour workdays.
Instead, availability of things (like basically anything based on transistors) that have become radically cheaper is broader than most would have imagined (Dear ENIAC design team, how probable do you think it is that people who lack clean water or adequate food will be using vastly more powerful computers to send text messages to one another in less than a century?); but 'science fiction' that requires simply owning a big enough slice of the pie to implement with today's, or yesterday's, technology? Probably more distant now than it was then.
...I can tell you that there are a myriad of problems here. It's not that easy to build an aircraft that is rugged for road use. Flying is particularly unforgiving of mistakes versus driving (think of all the idiot drivers out there). And the regulatory environment is hideously complex and expensive. Finally, think of all the traffic and fatalities with collisions if there were truly any significant number of "cars" commuting in the air. I just don't see it happening in any easy way.
Number of fatal traffic-accidents soars
As flying cars take off.
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
Flying Car != car that flies. Flying car is a vehicle that flies that supplants the automobile as the primary mode of transportation. Think cell phones replacing telephones, cars replacing horses, or personal computers replacing typewriters. The helicopter hasn't replaces the car. It isn't what these people are talking about.
The dreams of golden age science fiction came in two varieties: technologies that require massive amounts of energy and power (jetpacks, flying cars, space colonies) and technologies that require incredible control of matter on the microscopic and atomic scale (electronics, biochemistry, etc.) We've mostly failed to make progress in the first category, but we've surpassed the wildest dreams of every 1950s sci-fi author in the second.
Think about the drawbacks to flying cars: 1.) Amount of energy required to keep a car in the air versus on the ground. 2.) How many broken down cars do you see on the side of the road every day on an average commute? Now imagine they all crashed from an altitude of 100' or more. 3.) FAA would never allow flying cars to travel at low altitude over residential areas, thus forcing all flying cars to fly over existing roads, negating any benefit of a flying car, since it would still be "stuck in traffic" 4.) They'd have to have VTOL (Vertical Take Off and Landing) or we'd have to have runways built at every house, commercial building, etc. Until they come up with an unlimited source of energy, a mechanical device as complicated as a flying car that never breaks down, and sufficient airspace to make it practical, flying cars will remain science fiction.
They flew in their prototype at last year's AirVenture. The video looks good. What you're going to get is a roadster/plane with foldable wings. I'm saying roadster, because it's going to have two seats - not because it's going to drive like a sports car. This will make it qualify as a Light Sports Aircraft, which means that pilots won't need a medical (important for many). Licensing is a little simpler, too, although everyone I know goes for their full PPL.
As an airplane, it's not particularly fast (93kts cruise - slower than your typical Cessna 172 Skyhawk), and it maxes out at 460lbs payload (full fuel, I guess), if the specs I have are correct. It drinks 100LL or premium motor gas (which is cheaper), and goes some 400+nm, though I'm not sure if that is with reserves (you need 30min day VFR, 45 at night, and typically you want more).
The person working on this at Terrafugia advertised it as a plane that's great for a business trip, because it will get you home most of the time: if the weather is bad, you just land and drive around the weather. That's a neat concept.
The price? At Oshkosh, they were saying around $270k. I asked about insurance, and it sounds like there will be separate insurance policies for road/air use, and it seems that the road policy more expensive than a car insurance (they said 3% of hull value), because of the added utility (more miles driven/flown). I'm not sure if I follow that reasoning.
For comparison, you can buy a used Bonanza for much much less, and you'll get a lot more airplane for your money. You will also get a new Cirrus SR20 around that price point (but that's a plane, and as such not as practical). In the long run, as prices come down, I get see how this is going to be practical for a lot of people that need to travel for work (or can afford to go places for fun).