|
Oracle (m)
|
Technologically Crazy Cars
The impression created on our TV screen has really become a thing of concern. Where you see cars fly high and still land safely. In the James Bond Series we see a whole lot of crazy cars.
Do these cars exist? If not, I believe it will soon be invented considering the technological level the world is sailing at.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seun (m)
|
The question is not whether such flying cars are possible; the question is whether such cars have any advantages over the alternatives. That is, compared to a car or airplane:
- Is a flying car more economical?
- Is it safe?
- Is it more convenient?
- Is it necessary?
Ecomonics: A flying car would be more expensive than a medium-sized airplane, just as a modern-day car is more expensive than a bus or a train. The greater the number of people you can pack in your vehicle, the cheaper it would be for each person.
Safety: Each time your flying car has engine trouble, instead of just parking it at the side of the road, you will have to initiate an emergency landing. If cars are flying all around the city like in Star Wars movies, then anytime a car crashes veers out of control, it will probably hit several other cars and land someone's house (or head).
Compared to an airplane pilot, a average flying car driver will be an amateur. Sometimes some people will want to drink and drive, and sometimes they'll hop in while they are not fully awake.
Convenience: Flying a car in congested airspace cannot possibly be convenient. One small mistake and you're dead.
Necessity: Even in large cities like New York, people are using cars and efficient public transport (trains etc) to move around from place to place quite satisfactorily. In addition, there is a movement to create public cars which you can pick up along the road and drive to specific destinations that an electric train or bus won't reach. And there is also a movement to make more jobs suitable for working at home.
Therefore flying cars, in addition to being uneconomical, unsafe, and inconvenient, are unecessary in the concievable future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ka (m)
|
Oracle, Seun,
I don't think flying cars will ever become as widely used as cars, simply because the amount of expertise needed to navigate in three dimensions is vastly greater than that needed to navigate in two dimensions.
However, once the issue of vertical takes off and reduced noise have been addressed, I can see mass transportation via air really taking off ('scuse the pun) because it will be possible to have many more airfields in urban areas (where this currently isn't possible because of noise and space issues).
|
|
|
|
|
|
joftech (m)
|
In no distant future flying cars will be the way to go. The only thing that i see as the only constraint on it's development is the energy/power supply part of it's development.
People that proposed to build ships with irons where first ridiculed at, but now there's no wooden ships (for major transportation services).
All the dark side of flying cars that Seun highlighted will surely be taking care of when people decide to use it. Do we say because a car crash that we should all be trekking long distances, no.
It will be nice to have a flying car.
|
|
|
|
|
|
owo (m)
|
It is possible and will certainly be the way to go in the not-too-distant-future.
Safety: with GPS (global position system), autopilot and anti-collision systems already at work.safety is guaranteed.
Its already gone from being an idea.... men are already working on it as their full time job. Air transport is currently the most safe means of transport. Crashes have not taken the record from it.
Takeoff: Its already been addressed... upward thrust as a reaction to downward exhaust
Noise: Its an issue... the current thinking is that we have to ensure that the cabin is sound proof to a large extent. We'll see how it works out.
Economics: may be the only thing that may delay its take off. But with fuel cells and hydrogen technologies being encouraged by the high cost of petroleum.... who knows.. the break even point could be reached sooner than later
It just requires regulation like we have in the air transport sector. Think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oracle (m)
|
When this wonder of the 21st century occurs
i'll buy one and i'll make sure itz MERCEDES
|
|
|
|
|
|
joftech (m)
|
why must it be Mercedes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bibi (m)
|
The 1st flying car will neither be mercedez or any other big brand name.. Most probably a self motivated inventor, crazy enough to challenger the status quo. This is not a simple case of invention but a political challenge - its enough a big issue converting cars from using petroleum. Its possible, but the political will. The same for combining ground with air...some people will surely do the utmost to make it impossible, no matter the quality on invention. I see this as a mass product 100 years or so away. These new technologies will surely shape the meaning of development as new inventions will be more successful in developing economies than in developed ones.i.e, the so called 3rd world economies are absorbing new technologies at a faster rate compared with the Developed ones ..i.e. mobile/wireless telephony, 3G, alternative fuel conversion (i.e. sugar cane alcohol in Brazil to fuel cars, Coal in SA, Popularity in Hybrid cars), etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
joftech (m)
|
A flying car is already operational in the US. I can't remember the inventor's website, i think they have it for sale already.
The like of Boeing, Airbus, General Electric will most likely make sure Electric cars never see the light of the day. Hybrids are only becoming more "popular" due to the recent tsunamis and dramatic climate changes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seun (m)
|
What would you say is the difference between a flying car and a small 2-seater airplane?
|
|
|
|
|
|
anton (m)
|
Hmmmm.... Good point, Seun. I don't see the flying cars like Star Wars and Fifth Element. I see much better mass transit systems, that are maybe "freer" because of no tracks. I think future study of string theory and Prof. Oyibo's GAGUT will soon open to door to the mathamatical internals of gravity allowing us to create artificial gravity. The work has already been achived to an extent when some researchers used magnetic fields to levitate a small live frog. I think they were at a university in Utah. I think antigrav will open the way to much more efficient VTOL applications, leading to more efficient and economical regional travel. What do you guys think? I don't know; maybe family space shuttles instead of just a small car... kind of like a space yact?   Also, in regards to transportation infracture on the Continent, how economical are mag-lev trains used on a large scale. The snags I run into are how do protect the animals and passangers; ie. animal crossing tracks, tracks that have to cut through migration trails, etc, etc. I see too many additional cost associated with fences, raised rail ways. Just some ideas I have.... Hmmm, just thought of something. Would it be easier to sail in the ocean or over the ocean with anti-grav. No flying cars, well maybe for the rich, but yes to floating bus-like, yacth things.  |
|
|
|
|
|
joftech (m)
|
Mass use of flying cars will come but not now. The needed scientific and technical work are still in the elemetary stages.
And about Prof. Oyibo's GAGUT theorem, has he (Prof. Oyibo) come forward to defend the theorem?
|
|
|
|
|
|
anton (m)
|
@joftech You're probably in a much better postion to know that than I am.  |
|
|
|
|
|
allonym
|
ultimately, humans would not be involved in controlling a flying car. maybe if you were an expert, you'D do it, but i'm guessing for the most part, the cars would be flying themselves. If something goes wrong, the cars would probably be designed to glide to a safe landing, not just fall out of the sky. Most people's cars just don't break down in the middle of a trip for no apparent reason. There has been a series of events leading to that occurance. So, flying cars would not be more prone to this problem, and in fact, due to the percieved extra safety concern, they would be designed to be even more failsafe. And like I mentioned, they should glide to a safe landing even if all electronics fail. At that point, the basic skills you would learn (BEFORE) getting your license would come into play (like) landing a gliding car.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oracle (m)
|
why must it be Mercedes.
MERCEDES Is the ultimate believe it or not. |
|
|
|
|
|
Seun (m)
|
In my opinion, here are characteristics required of a "flying car":
- Affordability such that every middle-class family can have one flying car.
- More flexible take-off and landing so you can operate it from your house (no airports).
This is how I think a flying car would be different from today's small aircraft (2 seater airplanes and small helicopters).
|
|
|
|
|
|
joftech (m)
|
Flying cars will initially not be for the "poor". It's going to be for hobbist that are really ready to pay for it, if and when it's usability become more refined then it will make it way into the mass market.
Am damn sure there will be no need for airports or helipads too, else the name flying car will not be appropriate for such vehicle.
Editor says, please define what you mean by flying car first!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seun (m)
|
You are yet to answer my question on what makes the "flying car" different from today's 2 seater airplanes or small helicopters! I have given my own description of what makes a flying car, but you are yet to give yours! Please describe your own idea of what a flying car is!
|
|
|
|
|
|
allonym
|
Seun, you yourself have already answered that question.
By context or definition, a car is something owned and used by the average (well. . in the USA) person for personal->family size transportation for point to point trips usually not lasting more than 2 hours and covering small (<400mi) distances. Planes when used for point to point transportation usually travel over longer distances. Additionally, they are typically much larger than cars and would use up more road space.
So, a flying car would be a car with flight capabilities, however, it would still fill the transporation niche of cars - it would not be the mode of choice for super long trips (unless you're family is going on a "road-trip"). It would be used for transportation from home to work, shop, etc just like cars are used now.
The final difference is price. Currently, the fuel required for planes and helicopters are pretty expensive. While the range and use of helicopters could come into the range of use of a flying car, the typical flying car would have to have a lifetime cost that is similar to cars of today. Fueling for heli's are just too expensive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
FLYBOY (m)
|
Been there done that: A car that had detacthable wings was produced [ala the first picture] circa 1963. checkout a bond film of that era....... at present, there is a viable, pending approval, modern alternative...runs on normal petrol, cheaper to run than a n SUV, i.e. LANDCRUISER etc., kown as the M400 Skycar. www.moller.com/skycar/Quite a few models available..at a price Now...for your prsonal mobility to Mama Taju dow the road check out.............................www.solotrek.com have fun, I know I will |
|
|
|
|
|
allonym
|
moller's skycars are not available. The only one they have developed is a prototype. The "models" you speak of are early prototypes. Been there done that: A car that had detacthable wings was produced [ala the first picture] circa 1963. checkout a bond film of that era....... at present, there is a viable, pending approval, modern alternative...runs on normal petrol, cheaper to run than a n SUV, i.e. LANDCRUISER etc., kown as the M400 Skycar. www.moller.com/skycar/Quite a few models available..at a price Now...for your prsonal mobility to Mama Taju dow the road check out.............................www.solotrek.com have fun, I know I will |
|
|
|
|
|
Oracle (m)
|
WELL THATZ GREAT INFORMATION(DISCOVERY).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seun (m)
|
I don't think there's any need for this. The risks far outweigh the potential benefits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
allonym
|
Risks,
dude, you take your life into your hands each time you turn the key of the ignition of a car, let alone go out for a drive.
Everytime you walk across a street, you take your life into your hands.
Your chances of dying in a plane crash is much much lower than being struck by lightning. Believe me, there is NO real safety issue which does not already exist. The only issue is the that in the minds of future consumers.
This is why working on new technology is such a financial gamble, you're taking a big chance on consumers actually "feeling" safe, despite the fact that its not any safer or more dangerous than previous technology.
Trucks (hugh delivery trucks) have had lane departure technology in the USA for almost ten years. However, its only been in the past couple that its appearing in high end luxury cars. It would probably be 4-6 more before its standard in all cars. Why? Because humans are afraid of "ooh a computer crashes". Everyone likes to cite the MS blue screen of death.
Car companies have fooled people by not making a big deal about how much current cars are computer controlled. Imagine what would happen if people really thought about how ABS brakes really worked, or how the fuel injected into their engines is timed, or any vast number of things which they imagine a crashed computer would cause immediate destruction of their car and body.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seun (m)
|
Your chances of dying in a plane crash is much much lower than being struck by lightning. The factors that make air travel so safe today - very high atention to safety, highly trained pilots who generally operate in pairs, specialized airport facilities and staff to help with landing and emergencies - would not exist in a world of flying cars: - Flying cars will have drunk, underaged, or untrained drivers, just like motor-cars today. - Flying cars would have to land in homes instead of airports with dedicated aviation facilities. Added to the basic problem of air-travel, that you cannot simply "park" your airplane or flying car when there's trouble with the engine, it's easy to see why I consider the concept of flying cars extremely risky. And if you're going to dispute this, make sure you first define what you mean by "flying car". |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
allonym
|
The factors that make air travel so safe today - very high atention to safety, highly trained pilots who generally operate in pairs, specialized airport facilities and staff to help with landing and emergencies - would not exist in a world of flying cars:
- Flying cars will have drunk, underaged, or untrained drivers, just like motor-cars today.
- Flying cars would have to land in homes instead of airports with dedicated aviation facilities.
Added to the basic problem of air-travel, that you cannot simply "park" your airplane or flying car when there's trouble with the engine, it's easy to see why I consider the concept of flying cars extremely risky. And if you're going to dispute this, make sure you first define what you mean by "flying car".
I see your point here. 1) Flying cars will have drunk drivers - that is a significant safety factor. Perhaps flying cars would be made so that you'D have to pass a breathalyzer test to operate it. A drunk person would probably not be able to defeat this protection, even if it were possible to do so. 2) Flying cars landing on homes - not dedicated aviation facilities. Umm, what do you define as a dedicated aviation facility. Crop dusters used on many farms (in the US) take off and land on the farm. The farmers maintain the planes themselves. No need to file flight plans if you stay under a certain elevation. There are plenty of personal air transporation vehicles now which exist which don't require any type of dedicated aviation facility whatsoever. You can buy build-it-yourself KITS to make your own personal mini helicopters and fly about (w/o a license) in designated areas. Personal transportation does not require dedicated aviation facilities. Gigantic planes do. Nobody parks 30 foot trucks in residential neighborhoods, but they park SUVs and other cars. Similarly, nobody will park a Boeing 747 in their backyard, but many people can park their personal mini helis and i'm sure the flying car of the future is more suv sized than 747. 3) Where do people park planes where there is trouble with the engine? The cars would obviously need to have safety mechanisms for when the engine is disabled, such as the ability to glide, or parachutes which help you do the same thing. Do you know what happens in most modern cars if you run out of gas? The engine cuts off, power cuts off in the car, the steering wheel goes dead - ie no more power steering, and your car drops from whatever speed it was going to near zero. How come so many people are NOT dying as a result of this? The answer lies in a lot of things. . . be sure that flying cars would have these same features - engine warning lights, maintenance lights, warnings when fuel is low, etc. Just as people maintain their current cars so that they don't run out of gas on a highway at 70mph, I'm sure you'D probably not want to do it 6000 feet in the air. |
|
|
|
|
|
allonym
|
The FAA has (for a long time) been working on this idea called the " Highway in the Sky". It's actually necessary if we are to have flying cars (in the US at least). Certainly, the infrastructure for it can be built and supported with current technology. What is left is for more people to work on ideas. Like many new technologies that will emerge in the next decades, once you develop it, you face the even greater challenge of either directly convincing people to use it, or sneaking it into their daily life w/o them noticing. |
|
|
|
|
|
kinglarry (m)
|
Talking about flying cars? check this out:
The Skycar
Moller International has developed the first and only feasible, personally affordable, personal vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) vehicle the world has ever seen.
You've always known it was just a matter of time before the world demanded some kind of flying machine which would replace the automobile. Of course, this machine would have to be capable of VTOL, be easy to maintain, cost effective and reliable. Well, we at Moller International believe we have come up with the solution. That solution is the volantor named M400 Skycar.
Can any automobile give you this scenario? From your garage to your destination, the M400 Skycar can cruise comfortably at 275 MPH (maximum speed of 375 MPH) and achieve up to 20 miles per gallon on clean burning, ethanol fuel. No traffic, no red lights, no speeding tickets. Just quiet direct transportation from point A to point B in a fraction of the time. Three dimensional mobility in place of two dimensional immobility.
No matter how you look at it the automobile is only an interim step on our evolutionary path to independence from gravity. That's all it will ever be.
Moller International's M400 Skycar volantor is the next step.
|
|
|
|
|
|
allonym
|
Dude. . . did you read any of the other posts here?
Lol, I hope Moller is able to get this to commercial development in the next 5 years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
naijadey
|
A couple of personal flying vehicles the airscooter avalable for $50,000 is the closest we have ever come to a flying car. and it does not need a pilot's licence. Although the functionality is geared towards recreation than Personal transportation.   the GEN H-4 from japan is even smaller than the airscooter and cheaper too. It sells for $30,000. heres the H-4 in action and finally the now defunct solotrek that never made it past prototype stage. The company that started it quit after a couple of crashes in testing and evaporation of funds.  Perhaps the most well engineered of the three. The cowled propellers is one of the necessities if we don't want to chop each other's head off. The irony is the propellers amall size and elegance is what caused its instability. The larger propellers are far more stable, hence their success. Engineering is an art of compromise. These early flyers are still noisy because of the propeller and wind interaction, but they show that it is possible. The thing with inventions like this it takes time. You all should know that the car was not just invented by Karl benz in 1885, but it was a gradual tinkering among gutsy engineers that date back to Cugnot's steam powered car in 1769  Thats a timeline of 116yrs, and it took another 30yrs for the evolution to reach something close to what we have now. There WILL be a flying car. The concept is already viable, all we need is some fiesty marketing genius to change our perception, and a need for them is created. Gottlieb Daimler was that man for the automobile industry, Bill gates for the computer industry. We just need another one for the personal flight industry. |
|
|
|
|
|
![Nairaland [Nigerian Forum] Home](http://www.nairaland.com/Themes/default/images/english/home.gif)
Author
flyingcars.jpg (32.79 KB, 500x293 )
