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.

 

Flying cars imminent?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 13 2003 @ 02:03 AM
link   
yea, thats the biggest advantage...you can basically stack people as high as you want, just make sure its under airplane territory.

heck, I sure could use a flying car...san francisco traffic is pretty bad.



posted on Nov, 13 2003 @ 02:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by postings
The risks to traffic issues would be less. I read on howstuffworks.com (I believe that was the source) that if we took the current number of cars, and put them in skyways, instead of on streets, cars would be only as close together as 1 mile apart. There would really be no need to stop, since some lanes could be just for one direction, and intersecting lanes can simply go underneath.


1 mile apart? Maybe on a highway, I am not sure about in any major city where lines of cars going bumper to bumper extend for miles. That would have to be an awful high stack of cars to keep them 1 mile apart.


Jo

posted on Nov, 13 2003 @ 05:53 AM
link   
The concept of flying cars is alot closer than you think.

I did some consulting for Skycar Africa.
www.skycar.co.za

Presently it looks as if the first mass produced models are going to be built and assembled in South Africa as the country has the infrastructure, technology and production costs will be lower than anywhere else in the world.

The only people who are opposed to this at the moment is the helicopter industry and the pilots as it will most certainly put them out of bussines.

Even large airlines are taking notice of Dr Moller and the Skycar as it will dramatically effect the airline industry.



posted on Nov, 13 2003 @ 06:03 AM
link   
Hi again Jo

That wont work for me, don�t like heights and it was hard getting my drivers license
Gust fink what you gona have to go to,to get a flaying license�

Gust my opinion

But still intresting site skycar.co.za.

Nice one



posted on Nov, 13 2003 @ 08:01 AM
link   

The only things in the way are price, practicality, necessity, and legality.


Those are pretty big roadblocks....not to mention, logistics and infrastructure...(service stations revamped, navigational paths established, etc.)


Jo

posted on Nov, 13 2003 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok

The only things in the way are price, practicality, necessity, and legality.


Those are pretty big roadblocks....not to mention, logistics and infrastructure...(service stations revamped, navigational paths established, etc.)


Just like the compact disc, DVD and cell phones, the flying car will gradually replace todays forms of road transport.


Jo

posted on Dec, 1 2003 @ 10:49 PM
link   
Well for those of you who are laughing at the idea of flying cars.... he who laughs last laughs the best!

I have been asked to work on the final product scheduled for production to the public. (some radical and exciting changes have been made too)

My specific task is to kit it out for EMS & Rescue functions as this is my speciality.

Our first mock up version is well on it's way too.

Keep your eyes on the sky.



posted on Dec, 2 2003 @ 12:34 AM
link   
Man, that thing is so loud, it's not even funny. Imagine how loud it would be all the time with those things flying all over. And from the videos, it doesn't appear to be very easily controllable. I was actually a bit disappointed after seeing the video. They never took the cables off the thing and zoomed around like George Jetson. Too bad. I was really hoping it would be closer to reality. We need a new quieter propulsion system. Or is there some way to make these things quieter? You know, if I can't hear the stereo, there's a real problem.


[Edited on 12-2-2003 by Satyr]



posted on Dec, 2 2003 @ 01:18 AM
link   
isn't it hard to mass produce hydrogen?

I mean what do you need in order to produce hydrogen on a level to cancel out oil, does anyone know?

growing up I loved the idea of the jetsons. if the world went that route, there'd probably be floating buildings too, if we had the technology for cars, why not buildings? or maybe they'll orbit the earth like the spacestation & we wont live on earth anymore. im just being an idiot, but you never know.

anything on the hydo production?



posted on Dec, 2 2003 @ 01:18 AM
link   
isn't it hard to mass produce hydrogen?

I mean what do you need in order to produce hydrogen on a level to cancel out oil, does anyone know?

growing up I loved the idea of the jetsons. if the world went that route, there'd probably be floating buildings too, if we had the technology for cars, why not buildings? or maybe they'll orbit the earth like the spacestation & we wont live on earth anymore. im just being an idiot, but you never know.

anything on the hydo production?



posted on Dec, 2 2003 @ 08:56 AM
link   
not if the ITER project works out okay. because they can create it with that fusion reactor.

International thermalnuclear Experimental Reactor



posted on Dec, 2 2003 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by postings
The risks to traffic issues would be less. I read on howstuffworks.com (I believe that was the source) that if we took the current number of cars, and put them in skyways, instead of on streets, cars would be only as close together as 1 mile apart. There would really be no need to stop, since some lanes could be just for one direction, and intersecting lanes can simply go underneath.


We have the technology. The Moeller flying car works and is reliable. The major reasons we won't have flying cars any time soon are:

1. The FAA - they are the governing body concerning things that fly. A whole new series of flyways and flight paths would have to be established in already crowded flight paths. Flight in North American is strictly controlled. Especially over areas that could really use flying cars.

2. Liability. America is probably the most litiginous place in the world. Flying cars would drive insurance rates to astronomic proportions. Who wants a vehicle you can own but can't operate due to insurance rates.

3. Security. The Americans are twitchy (rightfully so) since 9/11. Do you really think they want to put a 1500 lbs projectile in the hands of potential suicide bombers?

Computer overrides and automated flight paths maybe the answer, but as of today they aren't.

hrxll



posted on Dec, 2 2003 @ 09:53 AM
link   
I'm happy to see that they are using the Wankel, the best internal combustion engine that I know of.

Still this thing would never be a mode of transport for all people due to the incredible usage of fuel.



posted on Dec, 3 2003 @ 05:55 AM
link   
got a link to the ITER project

www.iter.org...



posted on Dec, 3 2003 @ 05:56 AM
link   
[Edited on 3-12-2003 by MarkLuitzen]



posted on Dec, 3 2003 @ 05:56 AM
link   
[Edited on 3-12-2003 by MarkLuitzen]


Jo

posted on Dec, 4 2003 @ 10:37 AM
link   
I seem to recall the media and public calling Jules Vern an idiot too.



posted on Jan, 18 2004 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Most of us probably won't be around to get the oppurtunity to own a flying car. It's going to be like the computer, it's going to take decades to develop and the first ones will probably be in the hundred-thousands. As time goes on, manufacturers will find ways to make the cars cost less, but I bet I'll be dead by then. But personally, I'd rather have a Hemi Challenger than a Jetson car anyday.



posted on Jan, 18 2004 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Well, wont traffick control be a bit of a problem?

Deep



posted on Jan, 18 2004 @ 02:02 PM
link   
Flying cars are already here. They are called planes. Your just silly.




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join