A Production-Ready Flying Car Is Coming This Month

cartechboy writes It's 2014. Where the heck are our flying cars? We were promised flying cars. We should be living like The Jetsons, right? Well, we aren't, but we are about to take one step closer: a production-ready flying car is debuting this month. Slovakia's Aeromobil is planning to unveil its "Flying Roadster" at the Pioneers Festival in Vienna, Austria on October 29. The latest iteration is called the Aeromobil 3.0, and work on it dates back to 1990. The Aeromobil 2.5 prototype made its first flight about a year ago. The Aeromobil transforms from plane to car by folding its wings behind the cockpit. Supposedly, the Aerobmoil will fit in a standard parking spot and run on pump gas. In less than a month, our dreams could become a reality.

Comments

Crash Test?

[weilawei]

Bet you'll not see this in the US any time soon. I wonder what its crash test ratings would look like.

You mean our nightmare could become a reality

[Anonymous Coward]

In case you don't drive much, its already too scary with cars on the ground. Can you imagine some of these idiots flying around? The horrendous crashes? Care to think about what it would be like when someone careens into the top floor of an office building and explodes into a fireball? Thankfully flying tech has not progressed to reality.

Re:You mean our nightmare could become a reality

[FreeRadicalX]

Actually it prevents a shit ton of crashes.

Rules for aircraft are much stricter

[warewolfsmith]

You can drive with a bent fender, but if you bend an aircraft it is instantly grounded until repaired, this may entail x-raying the superstructure etc. So a small bingle in a flying car means it instantly becomes just a car until repaired and approved for flight. Personally I cant see flying cars becoming a reality any time soon.

Re:Rules for aircraft are much stricter

[slimjim8094]

It's all defined by the manufacturer and the FAA, who basically work together on airworthiness - the key word. You can only fly an airworthy airplane, so anything that affects the airworthiness of the airplane must be signed off on by a certified mechanic before further flight. The manufacturer has extensive and highly detailed rules (which they're required to enumerate for certification) relating to exactly what kinds of damage, wear, and modifications affect the airworthiness of the airplane. A bent fairing might not require anything at all. A popped tire probably requires inspection of the wheel and brake as part of the tire replacement procedure. There's all sorts of "must check X while fixing Y" rules, and everything has a lifetime - including the prop and engine. Furthermore, the FAA occasionally publishes "airworthiness directives" (ADs) which, usually in response to some sort of accident or failure pattern, must be addressed in a timely fashion (at next inspection, within 100 hours, before further flight, etc - whatever is specified). Non-compliance with an AD means that the airplane is unairworthy.

Most small planes will never need an X-raying - I think the reason that the big boys use it is because they have more exotic and high-stress components (e.g. compressor turbine blades in a jet engine) or they're trying to take a more evidence-based view of failure than "replace after 2000 hours".

(IAAPilot)

Seen this before.

[rmdingler]

It looks kind of like your average multipurpose tool.

Sure, it does both both things.

Just not as good as individual tools it replaces.

Perhaps misnamed

[MouseR]

This isn't so much of a flying car as it is a drivable plane.

Re:Perhaps misnamed

[The Grim Reefer]

Precisely. Driving out of town to get to the nearest airfield usually mean you're out of traffic and thus the whole thing is mute.

Of course it's mute. Who wants a back-talking flying car?

Pipe Dreams

[Frosty Piss]

Bet you'll not see this in the US any time soon. I wonder what its crash test ratings would look like.

It could be licensed like an experimental aircraft.

But... "I'll believe it when I see it."

Folks, we have heard this before, and "flying cars" have been around since the 50's. It's not practical in any sense of the word. Blade Runner is a fantasy that will not be realized for many, many years. It this point in time, "flying cars" solve no problems and create man oth

Deja vu...

[dpbsmith]

Googling on 'site:slashdot.org "flying car"' turns up numerous references to flying cars, ALL in very advanced stages of development and ready for production, flying your way soon.

Terrafugia... "Flying Car Passes First Flight Test..."

PAL-V One, "Finally, a flying car for the masses" made its first maiden flight...

M400 flying car "more economical than SUV"...

"the SkyCar, an invention by Moller International" was to be "Ready by end of year." And that year was 1999.

Re:Flying Cars

[weilawei]

Flying cars. From Wiki:

Although the estimated number of General Lees used varies from different sources, according to Ben Jones ("Cooter" in the show), as well as builders involved with the show, 256 General Lees were used to film the series. Others claim about 321 were used in the series. Approximately 17 still exist in various states of repair. On average, more than one General Lee was used up per show. When filming a jump, anywhere from 500 to 1,000 pounds (230 to 450 kg) of sand bags or concrete ballast was placed in the trunk to prevent the car from nosing over. Later in the series the mechanics would raise the front end of the car to keep it from scraping against the ramp causing it to lose speed, thereby providing a cushion for the driver upon landing. Stunt drivers report enjoying the flights but hating the landings. Despite the ballast, the landing attitude of the car was somewhat unpredictable, resulting in moderate to extremely violent forces, depending on how it landed. On many of the jumps the cars bent upon impact. All cars used in large jumps were immediately retired due to structural damage.

Call it a "Driving Plane" not a "Flying Car"

[Dr. Spork]

Somehow it sounds cool to have a flying car, but kinda stupid to have a driving plane. This was an observation made by Tyler Cowen on his blog. It's a good point. It reminds me of a survey of priests that emphatically showed priests are ok with praying while smoking, but not with smoking while praying.