Flying Saucers Go Into Production!!!!

A "flying saucer" that glides three metres above the ground and carries two people has gone into commerical production.


The M200G volantor: yours for under £45,000



US company Moller International has begun to manufacture parts for its Jetsons-like personal flying pod, the M200G Volantor. The M200G is the size of a small car and is designed to take off and land vertically.

Company founder Dr Paul Moller calls the craft "the ultimate off-road vehicle" as it is able to travel over any surface.

"It's not a hovercraft, although its operation is just as easy," said the aeronautical engineering boffin.

"You can speed over rocks, swampland, fences, or log-infested waterways with ease because you're not limited by the surface."
The craft was inspired by The Jetsons

The flying saucer is designed to fly at an altitude of up to three metres, where it benefits from extra lift created by a cushion of air - known as ground effect. This allows the M200G to glide over terrain at 50mph, powered by eight of the company's Rotapower rotary engines. Moller International has not arranged for training or licensing requirements to operate the vehicle. But it is prepared to offer demonstration sessions at its California base once the vehicle is ready for market. The company has said the price for its M200G could start as low as £44,340 depending on the number ordered.


THERE IS A VIDEO! CLICK THE LINK BELOW
news.sky.com...

[edit on 3-8-2007 by Samsonite]

Maybe it's just me but it somehow just doesn't look sturdy enough for my planned round-trip to Mars

the picture links don't work, but that video and article is AWESOME


i totally want one for Christmas! haha

Originally posted by uv777bk
Maybe it's just me but it somehow just doesn't look sturdy enough for my planned round-trip to Mars

You know they always release the weaker versions to the public because they can sell them cheaper. If they turbo'd out the engine and attached an oxygen filled space chamber, you could go almost anywhere. This would likely cost many millions of dollars though but I'm sure it's been done after seeing this footage.

Originally posted by kyyuulle
the picture links don't work, but that video and article is AWESOME


i totally want one for Christmas! haha

I just fixed the pics, they are the same pics from the article.


Yeah I want one too!

That looks brilliant and I so want one.. hehe

I wonder what the licensing requirements on owning/flying one are going to be?... and WHERE the heck are you going to be allowed to use it? If it's going to take off in a big way commercially, we're going to lead stacked suburban/city flight lanes (ala Fifth Element)

If you look closely in the first pic underneath the craft, there are small circles in the grass formed from the take off. Which makes you again wonder about crop circles. It's possible that spacecrafts have been designed with different cutouts on the bottom to form different patterns as more of a "calling card" that they were there or to identify a model. Just a theory.

And considering that some crop circle fields are said to have a magnetic charge, one has to wonder if there are vehicles like this ran on magnetically charged/ran engines.

[edit on 3-8-2007 by Samsonite]

Originally posted by Dagar
That looks brilliant and I so want one.. hehe

I wonder what the licensing requirements on owning/flying one are going to be?... and WHERE the heck are you going to be allowed to use it? If it's going to take off in a big way commercially, we're going to lead stacked suburban/city flight lanes (ala Fifth Element)

They'll have to issue a whole new license for something like that. Imagine having that license with your picture on it! Everyone would want to see it.

I am planning a family vacation to the moon and would like to know where to purchase the "Family Truckster version" of this saucer with optional rally funpack and metallic pea paint job.

I just wanted to point out before someone else "debunks" the test flight video that the line attached to the craft which is in turn attached to the large crane above it was slack throughout the whole test flight, and was probably there for safety reasons.
Otherwise, very, very cool!

Originally posted by Samsonite

Originally posted by uv777bk
Maybe it's just me but it somehow just doesn't look sturdy enough for my planned round-trip to Mars

You know they always release the weaker versions to the public because they can sell them cheaper. If they turbo'd out the engine and attached an oxygen filled space chamber, you could go almost anywhere. This would likely cost many millions of dollars though but I'm sure it's been done after seeing this footage.

Then why has'nt the tech been bought by NASA if its that simple?

I wanna see more video footage, something about that one just seemed kinda off for some reason......maybe it was the lack of sound. That things bound to be loud as hell.

Originally posted by Samsonite
If you look closely in the first pic underneath the craft, there are small circles in the grass formed from the take off. Which makes you again wonder about crop circles. It's possible that spacecrafts have been designed with different cutouts on the bottom to form different patterns as more of a "calling card" that they were there or to identify a model. Just a theory.

I think that is just sunlight shinning through the fan openings.

I'll have to agree with the previous post. Something about that video just doesn't seem right to me. Why does it look like it was filmed in the 1970's or something? That video has all the realism of a "Faces of Death" video. That's what it reminded me of for some reason.

I just don't buy it.

Originally posted by angst18
I just wanted to point out before someone else "debunks" the test flight video that the line attached to the craft which is in turn attached to the large crane above it was slack throughout the whole test flight, and was probably there for safety reasons.

I don't doubt that it's flying under its own power, but I've never seen it fly without the tether.

That doesn't do a lot for my confidence that it would be safe enough for me to fly without the tether. I would like to see it fly without it before I buy one, since that's the way I would probably fly it. It wouldn't be much use to me if I have to drag a tether every time I need to go to town for milk or crack.

The other problems -- noise, performance, emissions, licensing, insurance, etc. -- will have to be considered individually.

Originally posted by nyk537
I'll have to agree with the previous post. Something about that video just doesn't seem right to me. Why does it look like it was filmed in the 1970's or something? That video has all the realism of a "Faces of Death" video. That's what it reminded me of for some reason.

I just don't buy it.

This Moller guy has been working on this stupid idea for decades. Who knows how many investors he's suckered into throwing money down this rat hole?

[edit on 3-8-2007 by SuicideVirus]

I guess this test clip is floating around since one year or so. Good that they are mass producing it now. It needs air to propel itself, so no, you cant take off to mars

It must be made for rich people from Arabia only because those 8 engines would need a dedicated oil well for fuel.

Originaly posted by rocksolidbrain
It must be made for rich people from Arabia only because those 8 engines would need a dedicated oil well for fuel.

That's what I was thinking.....

It would definately be fun to ride around in one of those things

This idea is fairly old though.

In 1952, the Avro Special Projects team had started research and development work on a series of "flying saucer"-like vehicles. The only design that materialized was the VZ-9-AV Avrocar, funded entirely by the U.S. military from 1956. The Avrocar was proposed to the U.S. Army as a type of "Flying Jeep" that could also serve as a proof-of-concept test vehicle for a later supersonic flying saucer design, the Weapon System 606A for the USAF. Two Avrocars were built, one for wind-tunnel testing at NASA Ames and the other for flight testing. The designs were underpowered and only operated in a ground-cushion effect, much like a hovercraft. When the Avrocar prototypes failed to perform at heights above three feet off the ground, the U.S. Army and USAF cancelled the project, in 1961. Both Avrocars remain on public display, one at the Western Canada Aviation Museum in Winnipeg, the other at the U.S. Army Transportation Museum, Ft. Eustis, Virginia.

Source:en.wikipedia.org...

These initial test flights revealed the same problem discovered in the earlier studies. At heights of .9 m (3 ft), the Avrocar exhibited uncontrollable pitch motion coupled with heavy roll. The motion was unique and needed a name so Avro called it "hubcapping." Hubcapping occurred when the cushion of air supporting the aircraft close to the ground became unstable. The problem was so pronounced that flight above .9 m (3 ft) was impossible.

During these tests, the Avrocar reached a maximum speed of 56.3 kph (35 mph), but all attempts to eliminate hubcapping failed. NASA Ames had explored the other end of the flight envelope in the wind tunnel. They discovered that the VZ-9AV had insufficient control for high-speed flight and was aerodynamically unstable. Adding a conventional empennage (vertical and horizontal tail) did not improve these flight characteristics. The technical problems seemed insurmountable and the U. S. Air Force terminated the program in December 1961 after spending $10 million.

Source:
www.ufocasebook.com...


Obviously Moller international solved the problem of "hubcapping". I wonder how efficient they are? Fuel to distance ratio?

The thing is this has been around since the 70"s.Moller has been working on this for decades yes, and has much better prototypes.
Link-
www.moller.com...
Check out the M400. Makes the M200G look like a toy.

i guess that's some other gadget vehicule that'll go in the recycle bin
By the way, nice try

Why is this flying saucer attached with a cable?