The First Real Flying Car Is Open for Test Flights

DooKey

DooKey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 25, 2001
Messages
12,707
Co-founder of Google, Larry Page, is developing a new flying car concept called the Kitty Hawk Flyer. It recently completed a test flight and a CNN reporter was the one to do it. She received one hour of training and then flew for five minutes at a blistering speed of 10 kph over water for safety. This so-called car only seats one and it doesn't have wheels, but it is a nice demonstrator of the technology. Maybe we'll actually see something useful in the future, but for now this is just a toy for those that might be able to afford one. Check out the video.

Watch the video here.


But Kitty Hawk has other plans to dominate the skies. Another aircraft, called Cora, is probably more of what you’d picture when someone says “flying car.” It’s a two-seater electric aircraft, intended to be used as a flying taxi (not personal vehicle) in cities. But so far, details about its release date and cost are sparse, if not non-existent.
 
Based upon the fictional universe of Back to the Future, Skyways would be used and air traffic control would be strictly enforced. Obtaining a license to use the skyway would be much more difficult than a road based license, at least from what I understood of it. (Until something like that comes along, flying cars will not exist.)
 
rudedog said:
Why do they keep calling it a flying "CAR" looks more like a flying "Boat"
Click to expand...

Every "flying car" looks stupid. I won't bust their chops for that. However, it's missing anything resembling car functionality. The whole idea behind the flying car is that you can travel by air to someplace faster than if you drove, but once you got there, if you needed to go pick up a half gallon of milk at the local supermarket, you could drive there and grab it without having to have a car at both ends.

It's a stupid concept in general, so I'm not sure why people care that it's being done wrong.

This looks more like they are trying to come up with a new category of light sport aircraft, and being able to land in water means they get an extra 110lbs to the weight budget before they hit a less accessible class rating by the FAA.
 
When this is available to the masses, I wonder how long it will take for some nut job to "drive" in to a large crowd.
 
rudedog said:
Why do they keep calling it a flying "CAR" looks more like a flying "Boat"
Click to expand...

It looks more like a flying crowd dispersal tool. Flying samurai swords. Flying blender of death. Fly that down into a crowd of people and watch the fun. You should add a few of Musk's flamethrowers on there as well.
 
there was another flying car concept. A rod would lift a parasail into the air then forward momentum would lift the vehicle. Anything bad happens it just floats down. unless the sail breaks, then you die
 
Darunion said:
vehicle to vehicle collisions would certainly go down as there is much more space by adding another axis, but vehicle to building and everything else collisions will go sky high.

Get it?

drum roll?

k, I see the door i'll leave now.
Click to expand...
But I think accident survival rates would ..... plummet.
 
rudedog said:
Why do they keep calling it a flying "CAR" looks more like a flying "Boat"
Click to expand...

especially being that there are NO wheels! and i'm not sure that thing is stable enough to take on the interstate during rush hour traffic?? who knows...
 
Montu said:
Maybe we'll actually see something useful in the future, but for now this is just a toy for those that might be able to afford one.
Click to expand...

That's where automobiles started, and less than 100 years later look where that technology went. I think it will eventually become ubiquitous, but only if this global warming garbage is seen for the scam that it is first. As long as cheap energy is being sabotaged, transportation technology will suffer.
 
Their god-awful website said:
Height Limit: Operates between 3-10 ft off the surface of water

Flight time: 12-20 minutes (at 20 mph)

IS IT GOING TO BE LOUD?
Flyer creates thrust through all-electric motors that are significantly quieter than any fossil fuel based equivalent. When Flyer is in the air, depending on your distance, it will sound like a lawnmower (50ft) or a loud conversation (250ft).
Click to expand...

So, it has no more than 6mi of range, and only if you're a 5ft-nothin' waif of a girl (because the battery life is shit). It's limited to 10ft altitude and 20mph, and only over water (because any faster or higher would eat the battery, and the fall would kill you). And the thing is going to be 130+db in the seat, so it'll be unpleasant even with hearing protection. Also, it'll take at least an hour to charge once you've burned through your blink-and-you'll miss it joyride.

And it'll probably cost $100k.


Newsflash: a bunch of cheap, Chinese, brushless motors bolted to a fiberglass kayak hull does not make a "flying car". It's an overbuilt R/C multirotor, and no-one without a deathwish has any business being anywhere near it.
 
Hmm it would be more efficient with one larger blade turning slower, then maybe one horizontal to counter torque, and if you put it above the cabin you are less likely to walk into it.. Just a few simple suggestions, maybe even a better name: helicopter.
 
rudedog said:
Why do they keep calling it a flying "CAR" looks more like a flying "Boat"
Click to expand...
Just a guess but they might be doing it over water so if it does crash, it won't be like hitting concrete/land.
 
Only one problem: Their little demo just busted FAA regulations if they really only gave her 10 min of instruction and shes not already licensed to fly...
 
kju1 said:
Only one problem: Their little demo just busted FAA regulations if they really only gave her 10 min of instruction and shes not already licensed to fly...
Click to expand...
Not really. It's an ultralight, so no training is mandated (though, flying an ultralight with no training definitely falls under the category of terminally stupid).

That said, I'm not sure it actually matters on this toy. The thing is undoubtedly so fly-by-wire that there's no way you're actually doing anything approaching actual piloting. You're just telling it what direction you want to go, and it's flying itself there. In the event of an emergency, you're at the mercy of the robustness of its programming. (Hint: There's no doubt in my mind that it's running off-the-shelf open-source hobby drone control software on a cheese-grade Arduino board. In which case: you're boned.)
 
XenIneX said:
Not really. It's an ultralight, so no training is mandated (though, flying an ultralight with no training definitely falls under the category of terminally stupid).

That said, I'm not sure it actually matters on this toy. The thing is undoubtedly so fly-by-wire that there's no way you're actually doing anything approaching actual piloting. You're just telling it what direction you want to go, and it's flying itself there. In the event of an emergency, you're at the mercy of the robustness of its programming. (Hint: There's no doubt in my mind that it's running off-the-shelf open-source hobby drone control software on a cheese-grade Arduino board. In which case: you're boned.)
Click to expand...

Then its entirely useless as a car because it has only 5 gallons of gas...
 
kju1 said:
Then its entirely useless as a car because it has only 5 gallons of gas...
Click to expand...
...It's electric.


And, it's got a 6 mile range limit, a 20 mph speed limit, a 10 foot height limit, a 1 person capacity limit, and is unsafe to fly over land. At what point was useful on the table?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top