It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Moller Skycar M400

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 5 2005 @ 04:20 AM
link   
Has anybody got one of these?


I was reading about it at this site.
www.firebox.com...



Once private air travel was the exclusive preserve of the rich and famous. Sadly, it still is, unless you happen to have the lion’s share of half a million lying dormant in your bank account. The Skycar, though, has whipped the Firebox team into a collective frenzy with its vertical take off capability and vaguely enticing 380Mph top speed


This sounds 2 good 2 b true (imho)

If this is in the wrong place please tell me and I will get a mod to move it Thank you.
I think I am going to download the video's and give them a look now...lol

[edit on 5-5-2005 by switchblade]

(edit to change size of quote box)

[edit on 5-5-2005 by pantha]




posted on May, 5 2005 @ 04:31 AM
link   
THis guy has been promising this stuff for .... oooh about 30 years now give or take. What makes you think you are going to see flying cars any more than your parents did?



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 04:49 AM
link   
WOW!

I have just watched the video's.
The hover test looks way cool.

I understand what you say RichardPrice, But if you watch the video's you will see that this looks like it might be for real.

Has anybody got any other info for this?



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 05:11 AM
link   
you can find the stats on it pretty easy.

It's very promissing, gets better milage than most SUV's

Forward top speed of 300 or somthing pretty good.

The answer for family vtol skiing! Who dosen't want one?!



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 05:24 AM
link   
Just found a little more info.

Guaranteed Performance
Passengers 4
Maximum speed 350 MPH
Cruise speed (25,000 ft.) 315 MPH
Range 750 Miles
Size Large automobile
Best mileage approx. 20 MPG
Useful payload 750 lbs
Can hover with one engine failed
Can use automotive gasoline




posted on May, 5 2005 @ 05:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by switchblade
I understand what you say RichardPrice, But if you watch the video's you will see that this looks like it might be for real.


Hes been doing 'hover' tests ever since I first heard of the project, around 10 years ago. Seems like nothings really changed then



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 05:38 AM
link   
LOL.

You are probably right RichardPrice.

I still love them though,
Just you wait untill I win the Lottery
I will soar above you all..ha..ha.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 05:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by switchblade
Just you wait untill I win the Lottery
I will soar above you all..ha..ha.


Why not get a private aircraft then? Proven tech, probably cheaper and definately more fun!



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 05:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by RichardPrice

Originally posted by switchblade
Just you wait untill I win the Lottery
I will soar above you all..ha..ha.


Why not get a private aircraft then? Proven tech, probably cheaper and definately more fun!


If it was a jump jet then that would be cool, At least you can park it in the drive...lol..



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 01:34 AM
link   
There is one major reason why there will never be flying cars, and it has nothing to do with technology:

People can't friggin drive on a 2-dimensional plane, what makes you think they could drive in three?

Seriously, people need to learn how to drive...




posted on May, 12 2005 @ 01:59 AM
link   
Well as the Osprey proved, VTOL aircraft have not exactly been perfected. I'll give moller one for tenacity though, and he could do it in the next decade. I do not see these as a replacement for the car. Far from it, but it will be a more convienient way for point to point airtravel. It would really fit in well with this scheme.

www.pbs.org...

www.pbs.org...



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 02:39 AM
link   
"NASA’s focus for SATS is to improve air travel and safety by giving general aviation many of the advanced capabilities of commercial aviation at large airports. These could include new digital air/ground communications, new highly-accurate GPS to allow small aircraft to land safely in poor visibility, aircraft-to-aircraft locators to maintain safe separation near airports, and new ground automation and “virtual towers” to monitor activity and clear flights at unmanned fields."

Before you will be able to hop into a sky car in your driveway and set down at the local shopping mall, we need to have a system that is just about idiot proof.
Something along the lines of just inputting your destination and letting the machine do the rest.

We have GPS, weather monitoring, radar, proximity sensors, transponders etc.....
We just need to tie this all together in a safe vehicle that can pop a chute if all else fails.

Link to top paragraph........
www.arinc.com...



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 05:31 AM
link   
UH-huh.

Yeah, I'll park it right next to my amphibi-car and personal rocket pack.



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Even if that works, it probably won't be large-scale or transit itself would need a big renovation. In small numbers that might be ok. You might have to get licence and training for flying VTOL planes and prove you are trustworthy and won't do anything criminal with it cos the cops won't be chasing you in their cruisers, neither will the air force (they can shoot you down though but then you won't be alive to get a trial).
It would get messy if it were large scale. We'd need to invent new air traffic control for those things or else they're going to crash like gas molecules in a jar.

IMHO this seems to be a pipe dream to me. This craft showed up on the Janurary 2005 edition of Popular Science, among other crafts with similar goals. Moller's design got a rating of "stormy" (bad rating)



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 12:07 PM
link   
I doubt there will be flying cars in the near future, but I would love to be proven wrong


I think that he has been promising a flying car for so long, but it will actually be possible in the next 10-20 years with all the technology available then that wasnt 50 years prior. Thinks like electronics, computers, metallurgy, nano materials etc.. just get better and better everyday.

Now whether the govt would actually allow flying cars, and as to whether people could actually handle piloting them is a whole other issue. We might not be worthy



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 01:06 PM
link   
I think that complete overhaul of the transporation system would be a much better idea. Right now, if I want to go from Long Island to Washington, DC, I have to either drive and spend hours and hours in traffic, or drive to the airport and still spend an hour in traffic, and then pay for the ticket, or take a train to Penn, and then take another and spend 9 hrs on the train.

We need a pervasive automatic mass transit, so we can walk to a line from the place we live, then make a series of easy and optimal transfers to reach the destination.



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by VaporTrail
Who dosen't want one?!


Helicopter pilots. We know what it feels like to fall out of the sky. Whatcha gonna do when your engine fails on you, flyboys flyboys. At least a helicopter can autorotate (most of the time). I love the name of that website- firebox


[edit on 12-5-2005 by Chakotay]



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 03:56 PM
link   
In reality, the future of independent automobiles (even flying ones) isn't so bright. Currently, in light of the oil situation, auto manufacturers are attempting to re-design the idea of automobiles to begin with. Electric engines require lighter-weight materials. Lighter-weight materials require smaller frames. This leads to faster speeds. Faster speeds require greater driver interfaces...

Basicaly, we (especialy Americans) have to change our own veiws about automobiles and say goodbye to huge trucks and the soccer-mom fad of SUVs in order to create faster, cleaner running, energy efficient autos for personal use.

In fact, if we're smart, better mass transit systems will be created. Systems that are based somewhat off the technology of this hovercar. I do not foresee, either in the near or far future, personal flying cars being sold on a mass level to the average consumer for four reasons:

1: Traffic sucks, its going to continue to suck. Now imagine hundreds of "sky-ragers" passing your line of traffic to the side, top and bottom of you. Driver-controlled skycars would require complicated hovering traffic lanes and signals on multiple levels...far too costly and complicated, plus those who stray outside the confines of those markers could effect catostophic results.

2: Skycars would seriously endanger restricted airspaces. Instead of hundreds of planes to lookout for, you have millions of skycars. The goverment, especialy the military, prolly wouldn't like this.

3: As I stated before, people can't friggin drive on a 2-D plane, so you can forget about a 3-D one. Can you imagine the training you would have to go through to get a driver's license? Now imagine student drivers! This problem alone would effectively reserve skycars and skycar DLs to the very well to do only.

4: Auto accidents pretty much kill more people in the U.S. on a daily basis than anything else. Again, skycars would increase this problem. High speed chases would be terrifyingly dangerous. Stopping an automobile or having an engine failure would not kill the pilots and passengers, but kill, injure, or destory and people, autos, or property that is below it.

Sure, you might be able to decrease the amount of logical problems with skycars by having them all computer controlled. But not having a pilot operated manual driver system on board would not only be equally catastophic at times, but would negate the point of having a car to begin with.

Face it, especially in the U.S., the car means freedom. When your sixteen you get freedom with your DL, kind of like getting fries with a burger. People like to drive, like to be at the wheel. Skycars are vastly more impractical (both safety wise and energy wise) than ground based autos. Skycars would be mostly used anyway by the military, law enforcement, mass transit, or the rich. Hell, listen to (or check out the lyrics to) Rush's song "Red Barchetta", or read "On the Road" by Jack Kerouak and you'll see what I mean about cars and freedom. And if ot that, try buying a brand new car next week and sit only in the passenger seat for 3 months while someone else drives it. You'll get the picture pretty quick.

Besides, you can't put rims on a skycar Escallade!


Look at them rims! They'z spinnin! They'z spinnin!



posted on May, 13 2005 @ 03:41 AM
link   
as much as i would like every one to have a skycar in their drive way, the chances of that happening are very small. the closest practical use i can think of is public transportation (skybus) or something similar because they use relatively fixed routs, would be out of trafic making them faster and they would be easier for the govt to regulate.



posted on May, 13 2005 @ 12:51 PM
link   
Add in the fact that moller got nailed for selling fake securities shares to his company by the FTC and indeed the skycar doesn't look like such a promising invention. Lucky for moller the FTC was willing to let him go with an undisclosed settlement, but still methinks this guys ability to suck people into a pipe dream project has allowed him to spend 30 years making decent money and not really having to do much.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join