HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
A flying car built by 2017? I can see that, but I don't see these being sold to the public in the foreseeable future without a pilots license.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Until they find a way to provide lift without a wing, they should just skip 'flying cars'
As article says, you have to have a full pilot's license to fly it.I don't think giving them something that can fly without also requiring they pass the whole FAA pilot test thing is at all reasonable.
A flying car built by 2017? I can see that, but I don't see these being sold to the public in the foreseeable future without a pilots license.
Until they find a way to provide lift without a wing, they should just skip 'flying cars'
Drones that can carry people are more likely than a car plane.
Flying cars already exist. They're called helicopters.
We can already make aircraft without wings, they are called "copters"...
As article says, you have to have a full pilot's license to fly it.
Flying cars are completely useless at present.
1) You have to insure it as both an automobile and as an airplane. Aircraft insurance is expensive enough, and since its not a mass produced vehicle you will have to use specialty automobile insurance where you agree ahead of time on a value for the vehicle and they guess VERY high on parts replacement costs for minor fender benders and the like.
2) Cars are built to crash, because you can afford the extra size and weight, but with aircraft they simply aren't built to crash... ever. They are built to fly first and foremost, as its safer to just avoid crashing entirely. So a vehicle designed to be both safe on the road and safe in the air will suck at both.
3) You can't use automotive gas with ethanol in it in any aircraft by law. Period. Even our plane for which 87 octane is MORE than enough and it is certified for auto-gas, you still have to use aviation gas since no gas stations in the Houston area or really any major city will be ethanol free. So have fun finding fuel to drive on the roads.
4) You can't take off or land from roads, you can only do so on designated airports, which would otherwise have been a very appealing aspect of a hybrid car/plane.
So add all that up and it makes WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more sense to get yourself a folding wing aircraft that you can tow behind a SUV or pickup truck. That way you don't need extra insurance, no concerns with fuel, you can still park it at home in the garage with the wings folded, and it will be purpose built to be a light FLYING aircraft and not a driving one.
What do you consider cheap for insurance? $1700? To me that's already a lot of money, so to tack on specialty car insurance on top of that is a tall order is what I'm saying.1) SE aircraft insurance is not expensive at all for something with low horsepower and less than 6 seats. The likely usage would be like an LSA I'm guessing, since it probably wouldn't be much of an instrument platform, or have the legs to go long distances.
Compared to cars, airplanes are not designed for crashing. They have seatbelts and collapsible seats, but airplanes are designed to fly (meaning they are inherently built with aerodynamics and light weight above all other considerations), not crash. Most GA aircraft don't even have anything as simple as forward facing airbags, yet alone the attention and investment in crash worthiness of the cheapest econo-car.2) Airplanes are designed to protect the passengers as much as possible. Mooney, Beech, even Cessna put a lot of work into making their planes as survivable as possible in a crash.
That's what I mean, that the STC prohibits the use of ethanol in autogas. Functionally, while not an expert obviously, but the ethanol is crazy hydrophilic and just like boats aircraft often sit for long periods unused and that means water in your fuel which translates into corrosion of your typical aluminum fuel tanks and just crap performance in general. The lines and seals and what not aren't certified for ethanol use, and while most aircraft aren't as old as ours, the average GA definitely predates any ethanol concerns. Regarding modifying aircraft, that defeats the point of flying a certified plane and the safety that affords. Also, I hear that the ethanol can separate when climbing rapidly, and then you can end up with even more than 10% in your fuel, which studies have shown even shorten the life of relatively modern vehicles. Pisses me off and is just generally bad news and really annoying, when MTBE was working just fine as an oxygenate (even though even that is unnecessary IMO) and ethanol production from corn is environmentally irresponsible and all just about making big corn (which controls Washington) more money.3) Actually I'm not sure about that. I know STC's used for auto gas prohibit ethanol, but really it's an altitude ATSM vapor lock concern, along with the fuel hoses. Ethanol can cause certain types of hoses to "swell" leading to fuel starvation, at higher altitudes (above 10k?) on a hot day you can can get vapor lock in the fuel. There are actually ways around both, not the least of which is a self-pressurized fuel system. I don't know if there is a FAR that would outright ban ethanol, personallu. I think more than a few homebuilders have used various engines (Rotax included?) with pump gas.