Air cars will never fly (911 more reasons)

The cruise endurance is 2 hours, and even at high cruise, of 400 mph, that
is 800 miles. Where do you come up with 1000 miles range.

....Parabolic arcs, natch.


OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

Air cars definately will come as there is a need for a vehicle that
can fly into a remote runway and then provide transport along tracks
and roads or through towns etc.
They will probably be more like normal aircraft maybe with folding
wings. The obvious drive would be electric motors powered by an
alternator attached to the main aircraft engine as this will save the
weight and complexity of either a separate engine or complex
driveshafts.
Air cars offer advantages over helicopters as they can drive into
towns and normal carparks.
They will appear slowly at first and I do not see millions of these
flying for a very long time.
There are several aircars in limited use at the moment so they are
something we will see more of in the coming years operated by trained
pilots rather than the average car driver.
(MSu1049321) wrote in message ...
You know, if you're interested in what the societal effects of flying cars
would be, you could look at Brazil, I think it's Rio that has the world's
largest proportion of helicopters per capita, lots of them the smaller Robinson
jobs. They have a heck of a lot of heliports over there, and a
helicopter-intensive infrastructure and beurocratic framework. It seems to be
working for them, but they are pretty much only for rich civilians seeking
status symbols, and corporations, according to the article I read. Nothing like
George Jetson commuting, and even with their rapid pad building program, the
copters are outnumbering pads and causing a crisis in access and storage, not
to mention environmental issues with crowded, noisy skies. There are attempts
at rental agencies and timeshares that work like cab companies, but these are
not yet clicking. Now, when I try to extrapolate all that to LA, Chicago, New
York... it seems to only lead to madness. Whatever the VTOL technology is, I
think there are too many pressures and factors involved that militate against
widespread adoption of such vehicles in the urban areas where they are lusted
after the most by the average dreamer, stuck on the freeway.

I would guess that a sensible aircar would look similar to the BD-5.
The wings would either fold or come off completely. As I said drive to
the wheels could be arranged by use of electic motors (all wheel drive
is simple for rough terrain and I have already got a Cessna stuck in
soft ground). Fuel cell development may allow power to come this way,
or in the short term an alternator could be used.
One obvious advantage of an aircar is landing at a non manned strip
and driving to the local fuel station to re-fuel.
Road laws would be modified to fit (exempt) aircars rather than trying
to make them meet normal road rules as far as crash testing etc. is
concerned.
Going to an airshow such as Oshkosh shows the need for such a vehicle
as thousands of people arrive and there is no ground transport
available to reach hotels as rental cars are all booked out.

(MSu1049321) wrote in message ...
You know, if you're interested in what the societal effects of flying cars
would be, you could look at Brazil,


Which was my point a while back. "Air cars" already exist, not just
as expensive helicopters but in the form of ultralight aircraft that
cost around as much as a car, or sometimes even less. But I can't
commute to work in one, because there's no place to land it (even if
it were VTOL), and there's not a chance in heck that NYC would allow
thousands of citizens in ultralights to buzz through its skies.

To make the aircar pratical, you have to look at the -other- ability
George Jetson's aircar had, other than flying. It folded up into a
light, easy to manage briefcase when he got where he was going.

Solution in search of a problem. Your BD-5 car idea is technically feasible,
but operationally ridiculous.

Solution in search of a problem. Your BD-5 car idea is technically feasible,
but operationally ridiculous.


I can tell that your they guy who likes to stew in traffic jams.

What problems does it solve?
How about direct point A to point B Travel.

What problems does it solve?
How about direct point A to point B Travel.

From one airport to another, great. I think we have that now... have you seen
thos little cars and mororbikes made from abandoned and converted BD-5
fueselages? They look way cool, but have room for one person, their laptop, and
a sandwich, no luggage or anything like that. If you need to commute several
hundred miles, I'm betting you're usually going to want to carry a few things
along with you.

I think the resources would be better spent on perfecting convenient mass
transportation that pollutes less. I think computer-enhanced on demand light
rail is a better approach. More like an elevator on it's side. You walk no more
than a couple blocks to a station, tell the equipment where you want to go,
and shortly the rail car shows up and takes you on a routing past the point you
want to go to, along with other folks. You could also dispense with train
tracks and make this work based on electric busses that get power from an
induction strip inset into main arterials. On-board supplemental power carries
it when it's off the slot-car track.