10 ms·

Flying car completes test flight between airports

15 points by shivbhatt 5y ago

harambae 5y ago
I imagine one upside of this is that you can store it in your own garage (at much lower cost) versus needing to rent space at an airport. Similar functionally to a boat that you can tow, versus one you need to purchase a slip for.
afgasgbui 5y ago
>It is considered a potential solution to the strain on existing transport infrastructures. I'm pretty sure the solution to traffic is not more cars. Getting a pilot's license costs some $20,000. Fuel costs for small aircraft are sky-high and this thing looks particularly unaerodynamic. Obviously the maintenance costs will be high, since you will be maintaining both a car and an aeroplane. Even if the thing were free most people couldn't afford it. This will be somewhere between a toy and a business jet. Even assuming it winds up being practical for rich people to use for short jaunts, it will change absolutely nothing for the majority. I don't want to sound like I'm dismissing this plane. Every pilot knows about the "hundred-dollar hamburger" and flies anyway.
- runawaybottle 5y ago
  Given how America has tons of infrastructure that serves as runways (all highways), building a flying cars to go from point to point (highway to highway), might make a lot of sense for us, if they could ever truly become autonomous. The vertical take off stuff and noise are only issues if we try to go from one’s house to Costco, which we really shouldn’t be trying. Commuting from Philly to NY for work would take one hour if we think about it as highway to highway.
- JPLeRouzic 5y ago
  > Fuel costs for small aircraft are sky-high From the BBC link: The hybrid car-aircraft, AirCar, is equipped with a BMW engine and runs on regular petrol-pump fuel.
  - afgasgbui 5y ago
    I was talking about fuel consumption. Most small aircraft run on normal gasoline, but they usually get the equivalent of 10-15 mpg. The Cessna 172, for instance, gets the equivalent of 13 miles per gallon. This vehicle will be worse than that. I can see why that would be unclear from what I wrote.
    - rasz 5y ago
      Something tells me modern BMW engine will be more efficient than 80 year old design powering that Cessna.
      - afgasgbui 5y ago
        The world records for efficiency are here: https://www.fai.org/records?f%5B0%5D=field_type_of_record%3A1119 https://www.fai.org/records?f%5B0%5D=field_type_of_record%3A... The world record for the 1000-1750kg weight class is about 16 miles per gallon. That is burning jet fuel rather than ordinary gasoline. 1000 kg is light for a modern car. There are no aircraft that can compete with a Prius for transporting small numbers of people. There are few that can compete with a Hummer. (Note that I'm not sure how the records are calculated. There are a lot of relevant variables, most importantly how fast the plane is flying. And I'm not an aeronautical engineer, just a hobbyist.) EDIT: More information on that record can be found here: https://lift.erau.edu/for-the-record/ https://lift.erau.edu/for-the-record/ I get a slightly different figure of 17-ish mpg. Still pretty bad.
    - JoeAltmaier 5y ago
      "Its creator, Prof Stefan Klein, said it could fly about 1,000km (600 miles), at a height of 8,200ft (2,500m), and had clocked up 40 hours in the air so far." That sounds like pretty good mileage? Depending on the size of the tank, 1000km is pretty good range for an automobile.
      - afgasgbui 5y ago
        I guarantee you the tank is yuge compared to what you'd find in a normal car. All airplanes have big tanks.
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
  > Even assuming it winds up being practical for rich people to use for short jaunts, it will change absolutely nothing for the majority. Except that the failure mode (unlike for cars on roads) is that this falls out of the sky onto them or their house. There's reasons why flying has not been opened to a mass market, in the same way that driving has. Mass motor driving is more than bad enough.
  - afgasgbui 5y ago
    Commercial aircraft are the safest mode of transportation. Small aircraft, on the other hand, are deathtraps.
    - nopzor 5y ago
      general aviation has a better safety story than driving, when you look at it on a per mile travelled basis.
      - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
        > general aviation has a better safety story Quite likely _because_ , unlike driving, the vast majority of passenger-miles in aviation are not undertaken in small vehicles owned by the passenger/driver, or family thereof. i.e. because there aren't lots of "flying cars".
        nopzor 5y ago
        i said general aviation, not commercial aviation; commercial aviation has a better safety story by _every_ metric, by a large margin. general aviation is a lot of small airplanes owned by the 'driver'; akin to 'flying cars' ;-)
        SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
        Ah ok. Even so, Aviation is much more heavily regulated - compare getting a licence to drive a VW to getting a licence to fly a Cessna. And likely to stay that way, for these safety reasons.
chaircher 5y ago
RONALD WEASLEY,
JoeAltmaier 5y ago
An analyst criticised, saying certification is a bear and not easy to meet. But this isn't a commercial airliner that will be in the air for 40 years. This is a consumer car. Surely the certification shouldn't be for 1M hours as cited?
- vanattab 5y ago
  A crashing airplane dangerous to more then just people on the airplane.
complexanomaly 5y ago
Unless immigration procedures change hugely, any flying car is pointless for anything but domestic travel. Even then, you're relegated to private airfields with no document checks. Aside from certification there are huge barriers to adoption. Hyundai - amongst others- are hugely optimistic in their predictions. Being optimistic doesn't hurt their share price of course.
kadomony 5y ago
I'm sorry, man. Unless those wings can fold in, that's a fucking plane.
bguebert 5y ago
Its not really new. They had versions of these since the 1950s. They didn't sell very well though and never made it to mass production. Maybe this one will catch on. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerocar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerocar

15 points by shivbhatt 5y ago

I imagine one upside of this is that you can store it in your own garage (at much lower cost) versus needing to rent space at an airport. Similar functionally to a boat that you can tow, versus one you need to purchase a slip for.

afgasgbui 5y ago

>It is considered a potential solution to the strain on existing transport infrastructures. I'm pretty sure the solution to traffic is not more cars. Getting a pilot's license costs some $20,000. Fuel costs for small aircraft are sky-high and this thing looks particularly unaerodynamic. Obviously the maintenance costs will be high, since you will be maintaining both a car and an aeroplane. Even if the thing were free most people couldn't afford it. This will be somewhere between a toy and a business jet. Even assuming it winds up being practical for rich people to use for short jaunts, it will change absolutely nothing for the majority. I don't want to sound like I'm dismissing this plane. Every pilot knows about the "hundred-dollar hamburger" and flies anyway.

runawaybottle 5y ago
Given how America has tons of infrastructure that serves as runways (all highways), building a flying cars to go from point to point (highway to highway), might make a lot of sense for us, if they could ever truly become autonomous. The vertical take off stuff and noise are only issues if we try to go from one’s house to Costco, which we really shouldn’t be trying. Commuting from Philly to NY for work would take one hour if we think about it as highway to highway.
JPLeRouzic 5y ago
> Fuel costs for small aircraft are sky-high From the BBC link: The hybrid car-aircraft, AirCar, is equipped with a BMW engine and runs on regular petrol-pump fuel.
- afgasgbui 5y ago
  I was talking about fuel consumption. Most small aircraft run on normal gasoline, but they usually get the equivalent of 10-15 mpg. The Cessna 172, for instance, gets the equivalent of 13 miles per gallon. This vehicle will be worse than that. I can see why that would be unclear from what I wrote.
  - rasz 5y ago
    Something tells me modern BMW engine will be more efficient than 80 year old design powering that Cessna.
    - afgasgbui 5y ago
      The world records for efficiency are here: https://www.fai.org/records?f%5B0%5D=field_type_of_record%3A1119 https://www.fai.org/records?f%5B0%5D=field_type_of_record%3A... The world record for the 1000-1750kg weight class is about 16 miles per gallon. That is burning jet fuel rather than ordinary gasoline. 1000 kg is light for a modern car. There are no aircraft that can compete with a Prius for transporting small numbers of people. There are few that can compete with a Hummer. (Note that I'm not sure how the records are calculated. There are a lot of relevant variables, most importantly how fast the plane is flying. And I'm not an aeronautical engineer, just a hobbyist.) EDIT: More information on that record can be found here: https://lift.erau.edu/for-the-record/ https://lift.erau.edu/for-the-record/ I get a slightly different figure of 17-ish mpg. Still pretty bad.
  - JoeAltmaier 5y ago
    "Its creator, Prof Stefan Klein, said it could fly about 1,000km (600 miles), at a height of 8,200ft (2,500m), and had clocked up 40 hours in the air so far." That sounds like pretty good mileage? Depending on the size of the tank, 1000km is pretty good range for an automobile.
    - afgasgbui 5y ago
      I guarantee you the tank is yuge compared to what you'd find in a normal car. All airplanes have big tanks.
SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
> Even assuming it winds up being practical for rich people to use for short jaunts, it will change absolutely nothing for the majority. Except that the failure mode (unlike for cars on roads) is that this falls out of the sky onto them or their house. There's reasons why flying has not been opened to a mass market, in the same way that driving has. Mass motor driving is more than bad enough.
- afgasgbui 5y ago
  Commercial aircraft are the safest mode of transportation. Small aircraft, on the other hand, are deathtraps.
  - nopzor 5y ago
    general aviation has a better safety story than driving, when you look at it on a per mile travelled basis.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
      > general aviation has a better safety story Quite likely _because_ , unlike driving, the vast majority of passenger-miles in aviation are not undertaken in small vehicles owned by the passenger/driver, or family thereof. i.e. because there aren't lots of "flying cars".
      - nopzor 5y ago
        i said general aviation, not commercial aviation; commercial aviation has a better safety story by _every_ metric, by a large margin. general aviation is a lot of small airplanes owned by the 'driver'; akin to 'flying cars' ;-)
        SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
        Ah ok. Even so, Aviation is much more heavily regulated - compare getting a licence to drive a VW to getting a licence to fly a Cessna. And likely to stay that way, for these safety reasons.

chaircher 5y ago

RONALD WEASLEY,

JoeAltmaier 5y ago

An analyst criticised, saying certification is a bear and not easy to meet. But this isn't a commercial airliner that will be in the air for 40 years. This is a consumer car. Surely the certification shouldn't be for 1M hours as cited?

vanattab 5y ago
A crashing airplane dangerous to more then just people on the airplane.

complexanomaly 5y ago

Unless immigration procedures change hugely, any flying car is pointless for anything but domestic travel. Even then, you're relegated to private airfields with no document checks. Aside from certification there are huge barriers to adoption. Hyundai - amongst others- are hugely optimistic in their predictions. Being optimistic doesn't hurt their share price of course.

kadomony 5y ago

I'm sorry, man. Unless those wings can fold in, that's a fucking plane.

bguebert 5y ago

Its not really new. They had versions of these since the 1950s. They didn't sell very well though and never made it to mass production. Maybe this one will catch on. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerocar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerocar