Terrafugia's street-legal prototype flying car makes maiden flight

reply to post by Frankenchrist


I should reiterate what others have said... This thread isn't about the vehicle itself...

It is street legal... That is huge!!! It's a car that can fly (even though it's a caraplane) and it is legal to drive on the roads.

Originally posted by DaMod
reply to post by Frankenchrist

 

I should reiterate what others have said... This thread isn't about the vehicle itself...

It is street legal... That is huge!!! It's a car that can fly (even though it's a caraplane) and it is legal to drive on the roads.

And a 5mph fender bender will cause 200k in damage.

No bumpers on this thing, I'd hate to get into an accident in one, and with no back window and huge blind spots thats just what you'll get.

It's impractical and way too fragile for daily use on roads.

Originally posted by amongus
Two words...not practical

A few more.

Composite, experimental, canard...I own one, a Velocity XL. It still scares the beejesus out of me.

Originally posted by cerebralassassins


The applications of this vehicle or plane or however one wishes to describe it is amazing. The first thing that jumped to my mind is how extremely useful such a product will be for those who live in rural areas that need to cover large distance and simply do not have the required airstrip or hangar to do so.

If you are that rural, you hangar your plane at home and TOL on non-asphalt fields. Canards can't do that and have any way that their props will survive.

The way i see it is...


Hey honey, would you like to drive to the next state or fly there ?

It's not a flying car. It's a driving airplane.

I'm sure you could convert a Cessna to do the same thing.


I am not impressed.

Honestly, it's a rip off of a small craft plane. throw some hinges on the wings and loosen the throttle to allow more variable speed.

Still got this plane without wings, if you're knocking over trashcans and mailboxes with yer car now, hope you have some serious insurance for this.

I'm not impressed, as a person who's worked on Fighter Aircraft, I think our current methods of flying are completely idiotic, and in serious need of revamping / innovation ( they are basically controlled bottletrockets )

And I mean the air traffic? You have car accidents now, ok fair enuff, but PLANE ACCIDENTS! why does family A n B playing in their own home have to die now cuz someone got drunk or wanted to showboat.

Well, let's get one thing straight here...that is not a flying car. That is an airplane that you can drive on the street. It has retractable wings, and you drive it to THE AIRPORT. I'm not impressed, if anything, it's laughable. You still have to take off and land at the airport, and that makes it useless to anyone who wouldn't have already had or wanted an airplane.

This is just tricking people into accepting less than what is really possible so they can drag out giving you any REAL technology. You know what you expected when you clicked "flying car," you expected ANTI-GRAVITY. Well, me too, and I'm not accepting anything less. They can do much better than this in 2012, and they're using keywords to make people think it's "the future" when, technology-wise, it's still 1999. Same as always, they are draaaaging out giving us any "new" technology because they are still wearing out the internet, and television. How many different TV's have you bought? Cars? Even if this did hit the market, it would be a fad car. A Hummer or a Hybrid or whatever...expensive toy that is useless and inefficient and lackluster.

It's not the best they can do, and it's not that good.

How would the government justify Road Tax if these were affordable for us all?

Sky Tax?

nope, an air tax that is also for breathing, fail to pay and they cut you off...

Welcome to the year 3030... scratch yer ID chip off, cuz everybody ownz it.. - Deltron

Nice to see it could fly. Not the flying car we were promised. It relies on 80 year old technology like internal combustion. Not much different from flying cars from 50 years ago. I thought it would look good in the air but it does not. Some planes just look beautiful flying. Let's see what problems commuters may encounter in the sky.

Originally posted by doomweaver
Well, let's get one thing straight here...that is not a flying car. That is an airplane that you can drive on the street. It has retractable wings, and you drive it to THE AIRPORT. I'm not impressed, if anything, it's laughable. You still have to take off and land at the airport, and that makes it useless to anyone who wouldn't have already had or wanted an airplane.

The only reason you have to take it to an airport is because the government says you do. The plane is perfectly capable of taking off from a country road. That it MUST use an airport is an artificial constraint. In many areas, particularly places like the American southwest, I could see this as being very useful. The problem right now is price. Way too high. At those prices you could buy a perfectly capable and much more useful helicopter.

Originally posted by schuyler

Originally posted by doomweaver
Well, let's get one thing straight here...that is not a flying car. That is an airplane that you can drive on the street. It has retractable wings, and you drive it to THE AIRPORT. I'm not impressed, if anything, it's laughable. You still have to take off and land at the airport, and that makes it useless to anyone who wouldn't have already had or wanted an airplane.

The only reason you have to take it to an airport is because the government says you do. The plane is perfectly capable of taking off from a country road. That it MUST use an airport is an artificial constraint. In many areas, particularly places like the American southwest, I could see this as being very useful. The problem right now is price. Way too high. At those prices you could buy a perfectly capable and much more useful helicopter.

I bet that if and when this passes all FAA standards and is given the green light then your most likely to see a "Made in China" model for 1/4 of the price.

Not very practical, I fly 12 seater twins that need less runway to get airbourne than that thing

Originally posted by Moneyisgodlifeisrentedhinges on the wings

I wonder how long it would take before Jane/John Doe push the wing foldup button mid flight

Not very practical, I fly 12 seater twins that need less runway to get airbourne than that thing

I bet the good ole twin otter could do better than this thing.

hell a C150 does better than this, and for a cheaper cost too.....

The reality is that most airports have a courtesy car they will let you use if you talk nice to them.

So it really is pointless.

Originally posted by cerebralassassins
I bet that if and when this passes all FAA standards and is given the green light then your most likely to see a "Made in China" model for 1/4 of the price.

Not likely. Cessn'a Skycatcher is $165K, it is a conventional LSA with much greater manufacturing numbers and much less production cost.

The Terrafugia is unique, custom machine designed for a very limited market - regardless of what they say.

Originally posted by BalderAsir
hell a C150 does better than this, and for a cheaper cost too.....

Missing the point of this aerocar. It's about novelty, it's about ego, it's about "being seen in"; it's about "I have one", it's about 20hr Sport Pilots who want to fly day only mainly in circles since their distances are limited by their certification.

It's about fun, low altitude and clear vision fields, it's about those with mucho denaro and limito intelligencio

It doesn't solve any particularly pressing problems, it has way too many limitations for that. My airfields don't have fences where you could drive on in.

You could buy a brand new 162 and a good used 360 Spyder instead.