Flying car for the masses set for take-off.

reply to post by MarioOnTheFly


It could work like this -



I love that movie.

But yeah I see your point, would be a great deal of work for them to police it. I would say at the start there would be so little traffic that it wont matter.

reply to post by F4guy


C´mon $279,000. would be no problems for the masses

Originally posted by Lady_Tuatha
reply to post by MarioOnTheFly

 

It could work like this -

I love that movie.

But yeah I see your point, would be a great deal of work for them to police it. I would say at the start there would be so little traffic that it wont matter.

I love that film to but i wonder how they're going to make the traffic lights stay in place

Originally posted by AmberLeaf
It wont happen, look at the carnage people wreak on the roads. Imagine this same carnage above cities and towns.
You would have bits of cars/planes falling and killing people and destroying buildings on a daily basis.

Yeah but in the air you have 3-D movement, which means you have more chance actually avoiding someone else than on Earth, where movements are only 2-d, aka left or right. In the air, if you see an obstacle, you can go left, or right, but also over, or even under.

No walkers can walk in the air, thus, flying cars will hit less walkers on the streets than terrestrial cars. And flying cars would be able to fly over buildings instead or driving right into them.

Originally posted by LiberalSceptic
reply to post by F4guy

 

C´mon $279,000. would be no problems for the masses

I agree Captain. After all, a Lamborghini is about that price.

nice to see 60 years after the Taylor-Sweeny Aerocar One we are finally seriously thinking about doing this again!

i want one!

reply to post by swanne


Why thank you for acknowledging my correct observation of society

reply to post by Lady_Tuatha


love that movie too...but that's just computer graphics and special effects

But perhaps you're right...in the beginning..there would be so very few of these...that traffic wouldn't be a problem for starters.


Anyway..for my taste a great responsibility would be on the shoulders of the driver, and I would require rigorous testing for drivers before granting them special flying licences. At least in the beginning.

reply to post by swanne

Yeah but in the air you have 3-D movement, which means you have more chance actually avoiding someone else than on Earth, where movements are only 2-d, aka left or right. In the air, if you see an obstacle, you can go left, or right, but also over, or even under. No walkers can walk in the air, thus, flying cars will hit less walkers on the streets than terrestrial cars. And flying cars would be able to fly over buildings instead or driving right into them.

Even more ways for people to crash lol. You will have people flying into buildings, power lines, lamp posts, and of course each other given this new method to get ahead in the traffic.
When a ton of metal falls from the sky onto a crowded street it will cause more damage than a car running someone over by mistake.

Its a fantasy idea that has no way of working yet. When they can program and coordinate them with computers maybe we will see them in the skies. Take the person out of control is the only way for it to really work. Have it automated and managed like a train network. Set flight paths that cannot be deviated from. But this is where some of the problems lay.

How do you get say 500,000 cars to their destinations whilst avoiding other aircraft? How do you synchronize it so it works, i mean, you will want to get in and go somewhere without having to plan a route....how will this be realistically and logistically possible??? Flying is more dangerous and skilled than driving a car, hence it takes longer to get a pilot license than a car license.

You Don't need a pilots license to fly now - all you need is a valid drivers license - for a type of plane called an ultra light or sport recreational aircraft. These airplanes look just like mini versions of the big planes and are mostly 2 seaters with small engines.

I agree this idea will never take off, pun intended. Governments cant control car traffic much less air traffic for millions of people. This company is throwing it's money away.

If you listen closely to the video, its pretty clear that the amount of actual user involvement with the navigation and control of the vehicle, will be minimal. As clearly stated, this flying car design would rely upon a comprehensive data net being established, so that the vehicle could be largely guided by automatic systems for the majority of its travel. Literally the only exclusively manual part of its operation, will be the release catch for the emergancy descent parachute, and probably its operation when in car mode.

Aside from that, the idea will be to allow an automated system to control which flight path is being used, maintain distance from other airborne vehicles, and plot courses around, or over any obstacles such as terrain objects, for example.

I think this is an idea whose time has come. As far as controlling flying traffic I think the "Highway in the Sky" is supposed to dol that. I do agree that an autonomous control system would be best, but I'm all for this innovation and I say bring it on. So few people will be able to afford them anyway that this won't be a big problem for a while and Engineers will have time to work out the kinks so to speak while the few existing drivers are mobile.

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
You Don't need a pilots license to fly now - all you need is a valid drivers license - for a type of plane called an ultra light or sport recreational aircraft. These airplanes look just like mini versions of the big planes and are mostly 2 seaters with small engines.

I agree this idea will never take off, pun intended. Governments cant control car traffic much less air traffic for millions of people. This company is throwing it's money away.

That's partially true. A powered ultralight, such that you don't need a pilot's license, must weigh less than 254 pounds, have one seat, and must have a top speed of less than 63mph and carry no more than 5 gallons of fuel. For a "Sport Plane" (LSA or light sport aircraft) you still must have an FAA pilot's license. It can have 2 seats, weigh up to 1340 pounds and can cruise at up to 138 mph. Piper Cubs (J-3), Aeronca Champs (7AC, and some Taylorcraft models are LSA certified.

One of the biggest factors is noise. I personally wouldn't want anybody in my neighborhood gearing up a flying car or helicopter in their back yard while I'm trying to sleep. I would be forced to find a way to silence them.