Sign in to follow this  
Black Jack

Flying car anarchy

Recommended Posts

fake

fake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Point Break said:

300 milion people in flying cars.

bah ha ha ha ha

Job security.

Rush hours would be a hoot...to watch...from a safe distance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was the first flying car that I am aware of, and was on the cover of Popular Mechanics in the early '60s. We've been to stockholder's meetings where the car actually flew (tethered).

I inherited several hundred thousand shares. . . anyone want some?  They make great wallpaper.

Unfortunately they missed the new wave of drone technology?

Moller Flying Car

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Software is in the works that will de-conflict flight plans automatically, they’ve been working on it for over a decade. The sky is a very big place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've no doubt that the technology can get there, already is there for all of this except the energy storage.

But flying cars suck for the same reason they've always sucked, and no foreseeable technology will change that ... the entropic cost of moving people through the sky dwarfs the entropic cost of moving them on the ground. There are a few sweet spots, like jetliners, where the economies of scale of moving a couple hundred people quickly over a long distance in a tube, make it worthwhile over moving them on a train. But it still takes much less energy per person and per cargo to move them by bus, train or ferry.

The classic energy cost scale is that it takes $1 per weight unit to move it by cargo ship, $10 per unit to move it by train, $50 per unit to move it by on-road 18 wheeler truck, $200 per unit to move it by passenger car, $1,000 to move it by jetliner, and $100,000 to move it by rocket.

There will be a eventual market for wealthy people to move through the sky like this. But the order other 98.5% of the planet, it will remain moving over dirt.

Now, if some major new horizon opens up that allows energy storage that is at least 1000x cheaper and more efficient (like a Kelvin effect capacitor), and if cheap solar PV energy production can exceed 70% efficiency (right now, cheap PV is only at about 15%) then okay, flying cars, Jetsons, robot maids that make pineapple upside down cake, the whole thing. But we won't see any of that in our lifetimes.

The irony though is that we were promised video phones and flying cars. We did get the video phones and we don't give a rat's ass about them. The government installed video phones at all of our desks at the DOE and almost nobody used them, they kept the little shutter closed over the camera. We all have video phones on our smart phones and only three technologically adept grandmothers use them, along with a 3 million newlyweds. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way to make this economically feasible is to use neutral buoyancy or close to it to offset the energy cost of fighting gravity. That means a blimp or dirigible roughly~10m per side. When flying cars becomes a reality for the wealthy, they'll take a few forms:

1. fossil fuel powered jumbo drone style (speed and range but carbon intensive)

2. electric jumbo drone style (speed but limited range and low carbon)

3. electric buoyant (low speed, good range, and low carbon)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this isn't the right thread for this question, but I'm already here. Anyone know the answer to this one?

I bought a little previously-owned car for my teenage daughter this week, and while putting on the license plate, I noticed a little digital camera installed BEHIND the license plate. It didn't seem to be wired to anything anymore, but WTF? Why would anyone install a camera behind a license plate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mikewof said:

I know this isn't the right thread for this question, but I'm already here. Anyone know the answer to this one?

I bought a little previously-owned car for my teenage daughter this week, and while putting on the license plate, I noticed a little digital camera installed BEHIND the license plate. It didn't seem to be wired to anything anymore, but WTF? Why would anyone install a camera behind a license plate?

Was it pointed inside the trunk? That's where they kept the gimp.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For commutes like San Francisco and Seattle where gridlock aggravating and terrible traffic - I imagine these flying cars starting at $100,000 will be popular. A range of 25 miles is doable. Who needs HOV lanes and Teslas when you got one of these.

I am waiting for Facebook and Amazon to start making grass landing stations for their employes.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, IStream said:

The only way to make this economically feasible is to use neutral buoyancy or close to it to offset the energy cost of fighting gravity. That means a blimp or dirigible roughly~10m per side. When flying cars becomes a reality for the wealthy, they'll take a few forms:

1. fossil fuel powered jumbo drone style (speed and range but carbon intensive)

2. electric jumbo drone style (speed but limited range and low carbon)

3. electric buoyant (low speed, good range, and low carbon)

Helium is too valuable for that that, hydrogen is too flammable for that. But, your thought makes sense with neutral buoyancy with some genuinely fucking huge kind of structure filled with nitrogen only, since it's a little lighter than the 80/20 nitrogen/oxygen mix in air. It would have to be huge though. I did the Archimedes formula once to see how big a nitrogen balloon would need to be to lift itself and a little toy, it was literally about the size of a three bedroom house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, IStream said:

Was it pointed inside the trunk? That's where they kept the gimp.

It's pointed out, like directly to the back of the license plate. I'll try to remember to take a photo of it when I put on the new plates. (And it might take a picture of me when I put on the new plates.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mike in Seattle said:

Since it's behind the plates, could they have been moved up or down ?

I'm thinking it would have been a back-up cam.

I thought that, but it's drilled into truck lid, the camera is in a hole in the sheet metal, flush with the body. And the license plate mount on the Nissan Sentra (great car, btw) is also permanently set into the trunk lid. No hint of anything in the Carfax, that was so clean it could have walked into surgery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Black Jack said:

For commutes like San Francisco and Seattle where gridlock aggravating and terrible traffic - I imagine these flying cars starting at $100,000 will be popular. A range of 25 miles is doable. Who needs HOV lanes and Teslas when you got one of these.

I am waiting for Facebook and Amazon to start making grass landing stations for their employes.

 

Good thing the weather never changes during the day . the fog never rolls in while you are at work.. people flying these and trying to stay on a time schedule 

what could possibly go wrong?

they make people learn and then license them to drive cars and that has worked out so well no one ever gets hurt. so I am sure having people flying over your head will work out wonderful.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Overbored said:

Good thing the weather never changes during the day . the fog never rolls in while you are a t work.. people flying these and trying to stay on a time schedule 

what could possibly go wrong

I don’t think these will operate by Visual Flight Rules (VFR) in congested airspace. The National Freeflight initiative will be a mix of IFR and VFR Ithink. Basically you request a route, and the software de-conflicts for you, getting as close to the requested route as possible. This is also going to save big bux for the airlines, flying point A to B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole flying car concept was a non-starter from the first time it was proposed.

The vast majority of people out there can't even drive competently and yet they are supposed to learn how to fly? In rush hour airspace?

Just a Jetsons gimmick.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

The whole flying car concept was a non-starter from the first time it was proposed.

The vast majority of people out there can't even drive competently and yet they are supposed to learn how to fly? In rush hour airspace?

Just a Jetsons gimmick.

This is not a vehicle for the masses. It will be for a select few like private planes, the first Teslas or fast foiling race boats.

Just like not everyone will go to space. Those who can afford it can buy a seat on a rocket for $250,000 for a 3 hour ride right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flight controllers. Anyone can point and shoot now. You don’t fly these by the seat of the pants. You have to throw out all the old notions. These machines are not capable of being hand flown.  The future is here.

They used to say people shouldn’t  go faster than a horse can run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, mikewof said:

I thought that, but it's drilled into truck lid, the camera is in a hole in the sheet metal, flush with the body. And the license plate mount on the Nissan Sentra (great car, btw) is also permanently set into the trunk lid. No hint of anything in the Carfax, that was so clean it could have walked into surgery.

that is very strange.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have to land somewhere.  Even if the airspace is a huge 3D volume, safe and secure landing spots are in a crowded and limited 2D area. Parking a regular car in the driveway requires caution when kids are playing in the yard.  Landing the human body dicer/slicer in the driveway will shred a few people.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, derelicte said:

that is very strange.

I took the plate off and took a photo, could it have been a factory install?

11l0fba.jpg

xc0sqs.jpg

I would like to pull off the trunk liner, see if there are wires in there. It's not really a "sash weight level mystery" but it is weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from those pictures it looks like a camera, but is there a lens over it? could it just be a funny shaped bumper? does it have a backup camera?

if it is a backup camera, there is no way it came from the factory like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, mikewof said:

I took the plate off and took a photo, could it have been a factory install?

11l0fba.jpg

xc0sqs.jpg

I would like to pull off the trunk liner, see if there are wires in there. It's not really a "sash weight level mystery" but it is weird.

Okay...........thats odd indeed. I'd say it rivals the sash weight...at least from a curiosity perspective........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer the CGI and filmaking for this flying car scene.

I couldn't find the original Blade Runner scene where the cab pulls up along side the thirtieth floor. That was funny.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, mikewof said:

I took the plate off and took a photo, could it have been a factory install?

11l0fba.jpg

xc0sqs.jpg

I would like to pull off the trunk liner, see if there are wires in there. It's not really a "sash weight level mystery" but it is weird.

Factory install? If the car doesn't fly, at least the dad who bought it does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mikewof said:

I've no doubt that the technology can get there, already is there for all of this except the energy storage.

Yes, the tech is called airplanes and helicopters. Like Istream points out, flying "cars" is totally a technology issue, including energy density. Not storage per se, density. And the physics of lift and flight control is the primary hurdle.

You want something that drives well on the roads, stores in your garage, has vertical takeoff and landing and flies well, even with total computer control? That's a huge technology issue. Assume you have some hyper dense fuel/energy source. If you could magically power a bunch of turbines, they still emit tremendous heat and noise. And propeller lift, like a large four motor drone, has very tight limitations plus the noise. These are all technology issues that make flying cars currently absurd. Except the ones in Blade Runner. Those were cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to be able to fly somewhere and not be hampered by traffic and shit? Want to spend lots of money to go someplace that humans aren't meant to be - with all the inherent dangers that involves? Get your fucking pilots license, stop closing GA airports, stop complaining about GA airplane noise, and drop this retarded cockamany tired fukcking fucking fucking dumbmotherfuckingflyingcuntfuckingcarbullfuckerywhoresechit. 

next there'll be a thread about circular runways and how private ATC will better.

FUCK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, lasal said:

Yes, the tech is called airplanes and helicopters. Like Istream points out, flying "cars" is totally a technology issue, including energy density. Not storage per se, density. And the physics of lift and flight control is the primary hurdle.

You want something that drives well on the roads, stores in your garage, has vertical takeoff and landing and flies well, even with total computer control? That's a huge technology issue. Assume you have some hyper dense fuel/energy source. If you could magically power a bunch of turbines, they still emit tremendous heat and noise. And propeller lift, like a large four motor drone, has very tight limitations plus the noise. These are all technology issues that make flying cars currently absurd. Except the ones in Blade Runner. Those were cool.

I haven't seen the new Blade Runner, the older one was excellent.

In addition to all of this, the elephant in the room is the economic driver for flying cars seems to be slowly eroding. Back in the golden age of automobile commuting, the reason the era of the automobile took off was because of the overwhelming need to get workers from their suburban homes to their place of work. But now, the work is just as likely to come to the worker, with things like VPN and telecommuting. Flying common workers to their jobs doesn't seem like a huge growth industry to me, but flying boxes of useless electronic crap and snacks and six packs of piss water to suburbanites by Amazon-style drones, that seems very much like a growth industry. Why fly my 180 lb. ass to the Chinese restaurant and to work, if I can instead be locked into my home, and have my work come over my phone line and the couple pounds of General Tzo's chicken flown onto my front lawn? (With my luck, the damned coyotes will get my food before I do.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Rasputin22 said:

circular_runway_round_airport_endless_henk_hesselink_2.0.jpg

Obviously faked - that runway would have to be banked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mikewof said:

I know this isn't the right thread for this question, but I'm already here. Anyone know the answer to this one?

I bought a little previously-owned car for my teenage daughter this week, and while putting on the license plate, I noticed a little digital camera installed BEHIND the license plate. It didn't seem to be wired to anything anymore, but WTF? Why would anyone install a camera behind a license plate?

It’s a Backup camera

https://www.amazon.com/Audiovox-ACA200W-License-Camera-System/dp/B0016HRCS4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mikewof said:

I haven't seen the new Blade Runner, the older one was excellent.

In addition to all of this, the elephant in the room is the economic driver for flying cars seems to be slowly eroding. Back in the golden age of automobile commuting, the reason the era of the automobile took off was because of the overwhelming need to get workers from their suburban homes to their place of work. But now, the work is just as likely to come to the worker, with things like VPN and telecommuting. Flying to workers to their jobs doesn't seem like a huge growth industry to me, but flying boxes of useless electronic crap and snacks and six packs of piss water to suburbanites by Amazon-style drones, that seems very much like a growth industry. Why fly my 180 lb. ass to the Chinese restaurant and to work, if I can instead be locked into my home, and have my work come over my phone line and the couple pounds of General Tzo's chicken flown onto my front lawn? (With my luck, the damned coyotes will get my food before I do.)

Mikey, is this you? Nice decoy call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Obviously faked - that runway would have to be banked.

It's a rendering, so in a sense yes faked. The runway is banked, fake as it is, and the promoters are serious while the idea isn't. It would be fun to get vectored into that pattern and fly an instrument approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flying cars would offer some safety if you could deploy the wings fast enough.

 

Ah, the Fifth Element.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 minutes ago, SailBlueH2O said:

My vision of this concept would be not personal flying vehicles...but airborne pilot less air buses...yeah it sounds as radical as flying did to the masses 100 years ago....minimal infrastructure impact...as opposed to the "self driving" cars touted....it is obvious the highways are maxed out for individual traffic ...

It seems that they were never designed for this level of use, it's just nuts to get on a highway, inch along at 15 mph, and still get there faster than if you took the congested side streets.

Denver installed a light rail system fairly recently, it was expensive and it's very slow, the nature of the stops and running trains through an urban area and grade crossings means it tends to do about 25 mph a lot of the time. The real cost of mass transit is now integrating it into the already-built urban environment. It's expensive to disrupt business, roads, and homes and burying like they did in NYC it is even more expensive with all the stuff that's down there. Your flying bus idea would be good, seems some ways off. It seems the more immediate solutions to the congestion problem is a mix of these ...

1. Use-based fees ... you pay more, you get to take the faster, lower traffic lanes. This one is already used, it's profitable, but the idea of it reeks, the taxpayers who build stuff have to pay extra to have a functional use.

2. Do nothing ... let the roads get ever more congested, people will work out their own solutions. This is cheap too, but it tends to murder economic development eventually, and it makes cities unlivable.

3. High-density road transport ... don't let humans drive the roads at all, the cars would be intelligent enough to negotiate their own space, the occupants would be along for the ride. The problem with this one is that just one or two mechanical breakdown or flat tire and the whole shebang goes to shit.

4. Road segmentation ... Put the heavy vehicles and trucks in their own lanes, and the super-efficient, small microcars and bikes in their own lanes. This works, mostly, with some complications.

5. Tax the shit out driving with fuel tax or use time-based fees ... It works, but it kills economic development. 

6. Keep encouraging telework, decentralized business, etc. ... this does work, but with the end game that a huge chunk of the population works from their homes, what happens to the nature of the economy, with fewer people to go out for lunch, or pick up their dry-cleaning, etc.?

7. Better mass transit ... again, it works, but it's expensive, especially adding new rail. One thing that might be excellent now that the age of tokenized ride sharing is here, is to "Uberize" and "Lyftize" buses. A nice double-decker bus picks you up at the stop, it has WiFi, restrooms, coffee and other comforts on board, and the smartphone tokenization allows it to improve pick-up and drop-off efficiency, skip stops where nobody needs a bus, send more busses where more people are waiting. This one would be cheap, it just needs some government deregulation and guidance to keep it equitable, and avoid created a class-based mass transit system, where poor people still take the old shitty busses, which then gradually decay due to lack of funding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, lasal said:

 

 

This looks like a good movie, I've never seen it. I love that they Cheb Khaled's music in this scene.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Real classy bunch riding the buses in Denver from what I saw. The bus drivers were great though. Bus stops reeked of piss and I saw a city flatbed truck with a Parks Dept logo on it pull up next to a nice covered bus stop that some bum had been living in with his grocery cart and more bags of crap than you could imaging. The bum was asleep on the bench and the Parks guy jumps up on the flatbed and cranks up a B&S waterpump hooked up to a big watertank and just hoses the stinky bum down. He jumps up and grabs his shopping cart and gear and just moves down to the next stop. I asked the park guy if that was his job and he said no he was just there to try and mitigate the pisshole smell and turns on the orange citrus based cleaner and proceeds to pressure wash and scrub and squeegee everything down well. He then smiled and said that hosing the bums themselves was not really permissable but he considered it one of the perks of his job. The bum and a couple of others moved back in the next day. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, SailBlueH2O said:

Always wondered what "firemen" did between calls......:D

That isn't the half of it.................;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Marcjsmith said:

but it would be behind the lic plate....  so unless the lic plate had a hole cut in it....  it would be pretty useless

States with transparent licence plates? A hidden camera to detect license plate theft? A James Bond style motorized flip up license plate for when you back up? Maybe someone at the installers screwed up and left it there? 

I can call the service department at John Elway Nissan and see if they have any ideas why anyone would do something so monstrously bizarre. I even tried googling it, nada.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mikewof said:

This looks like a good movie, I've never seen it. I love that they Cheb Khaled's music in this scene.

Definitely put it on the list. Great fun and stands the test of time. I'd call it underrated but I think it was pretty highly rated back in the day. Maybe more of a sleeper these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone notice the claim in the Blackfly website that their plane uses 245 watt-hours per mile? I'll call bullshit on that.

That claim then is about 0.5 kJ per meter. So lessee, according to their website, the plane weighs 330 lbs, and will carry a 250 lbs. payload, thus about 250 kg. Assuming you fly it for one meter, and for safety, need to fly above tree line, say a minimum of 50 meters, the energy cost to get you up to that height and safely descend again would be about (250 kg)(9.8 m/s^2)(50 m)(2 times) = 245 kJ, about 500 times more than their claim. And that doesn't even include any of the energy cost to fight wind resistance to move you that one mile, that's just the energy cost to move you up to your cruising altitude and then gently descend you back to the ground. Say the props have some energy recovery for the return trip (they probably don't) and you save some energy coming back down again, maybe 200 kJ best case scenario, add in the wind resistant to move it one mile and the energy cost to hold it up in the air for a few minutes, and you're way, way above their claim. Maybe their energy claim was for a single mile once you've already brought it to altitude, and it doesn't include the energy needed to hover, just x-component of the energy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I doubt my little 12.6 meter wingspan composite sailplane which weighs 293 lbs could fly straight and level for 245 watt hours per mile with my 260 lbs butt sitting in it. I'm dreaming that I can add an electric sustainer engine to it someday and looked into the power requirements and I agree with Mike that the Blackfly is off by a decimal point or more.

    I find it odd that it uses that extreme nose up attitude for VTOL when it seems like it could simple rise level like a quad drone.  That nose up launch would feel like a winch launch in a sailplane!

Look at this fine example of a launch winch! Lots of watts in that old rustbucket...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rasputin22 said:

Yeah, I doubt my little 12.6 meter wingspan composite sailplane which weighs 293 lbs fly straight and level for 245 watt hours per mile with my 260 lbs butt sitting in it. I'm dreaming that I can add an electric sustainer engine to it someday and looked into the power requirements and I agree with Mike that the Blackfly is off by a decimal point or more.

 

Yeah, that sounds like the correct weight of a high performance, engineless plane. But they claim their entire plane, with batteries, 8 electric motors, control surfaces and cockpit weighs a bit more 300 lbs., with enough battery power to fly 25 miles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rasputin22 said:

Look at this fine example of a launch winch! Lots of watts in that old rustbucket...

 

Rasper, is that out at Hope?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Marcjsmith said:

but it would be behind the lic plate....  so unless the lic plate had a hole cut in it....  it would be pretty useless

This isn’t rocket surgery here. I did the same thing on a previous car for the rear dash cam. I drilled a hole through the license plate, just like you said. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

245 Wh/mile isn't a whole lot more than someone burns running a mile on the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Rasper, is that out at Hope?

I think New Zealand. I cut the beginning, watch the opening and I think that they say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the winch idea, but that acceleration and subsequent all out climb rate while pressurizing a fence wire presents too many variables for my taste. I'll take a slow tow thanks, once I do a glider cert. They are really cool.

The blackfly looks wrong to me too. Those wing prop assemblies are no way fast enough in rotation tangential to the fuselage for smooth control. No f'in way.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, mikewof said:

This looks like a good movie, I've never seen it. I love that they Cheb Khaled's music in this scene.

I'm a fan. It's funny. Comedic dystopia is brave. They figured it out, and Bruce Willis was excellent in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lasal said:

I like the winch idea, but that acceleration and subsequent all out climb rate while pressurizing a fence wire presents too many variables for my taste. I'll take a slow tow thanks, once I do a glider cert. They are really cool.

The blackfly looks wrong to me too. Those wing prop assemblies are no way fast enough in rotation tangential to the fuselage for smooth control. No f'in way.

 

Fence wires are in the past, they are using smaller lighter Spectra now with good results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A spectra cable would be more resilient and far more flexible. The fence wire sounded sketchy!

Climbing like that while pulling against a line/cable still sounds sketch. But whatever, I'm in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Monkey said:

This isn’t rocket surgery here. I did the same thing on a previous car for the rear dash cam. I drilled a hole through the license plate, just like you said. 

That makes sense, because then the hole in the body panel is less likely to rust I think, and the damage is hidden. Now they have wireless cams, but that seems a good way to handle the need for a hole.

Why did you choose to do it that way? Any overly pedantic Barney Fife type ever give you stress for damaging state property?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, NaptimeAgain said:

3-D gridlock.  Sounds like chaos and disaster.  Running out of gas will be painful.

Well, the bright side is fender-bender's won't block traffic anymore. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Rasputin22 said:
11 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Rasper, is that out at Hope?

I think New Zealand. I cut the beginning, watch the opening and I think that they say.

Mt Beauty, Victoria Australia.

the goal for many of paragliding tasks run down in Bright in the next valley, it has a beer fridge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, lasal said:

I like the winch idea, but that acceleration and subsequent all out climb rate while pressurizing a fence wire presents too many variables for my taste. I'll take a slow tow thanks, once I do a glider cert. They are really cool.

The blackfly looks wrong to me too. Those wing prop assemblies are no way fast enough in rotation tangential to the fuselage for smooth control. No f'in way.

 

Looks like they've also got outboard flaps elevons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Rasputin22 said:

And then there is this!

 

That's weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Mark K said:

Well, the bright side is fender-bender's won't block traffic anymore. 

Unless you are a poor sob and the aero car falls out the sky onto the highway you are driving on...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Rasputin22 said:

 

Damn social media ruining you kids attention span.

With the right wind direction and lack of obstacles aircraft can land these days pretty much in the length of a typical parking space.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those guys are amazing - spring into the air and step down onto the ground.

Watching them do that on rocky river banks is quite something too - most of the landing is done skimming the river and they just stop on the bank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Those guys are amazing - spring into the air and step down onto the ground.

Watching them do that on rocky river banks is quite something too - most of the landing is done skimming the river and they just stop on the bank.

that little modified Cub was nuts, it seemed to take off as soon as the wheels went all the way around, and the landing, was that basically a controlled stall?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/13/2018 at 4:34 AM, IStream said:

That means a blimp or dirigible roughly~10m per side...

3. electric buoyant (low speed, good range, and low carbon) 

But huge. Don't forget huge. 10m per side is something like 300 times the volume of a full sized car but with He only lifts about half of the mass of a full sized car.* 1k m^3 He gets roughly 1.1k kg total buoyancy.*  Payload after you've contained the He and attached machinery and accommodations isn't likely to be on the order "car load".  I wonder if this is a solution to traffic congestion? Parking might be an amusing spectator sport.

*  I googled full sized car volume and mass and just put in the first numbers that came up (3.4m^3 and 2k kg). Could be total BS. Dunno. Doesn't change the point that in volume per payload terms airships are remarkably horrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2K Kg is a heavy car - 4400 Lbs.

If that's the current average weight it must include a LOT of big SUV's. My dad's '65 Impala land yacht only weighed 3800.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? I’m surprised that’s a heavy car. Mrs PB’s XK is 4000 and my big Ford Expedition is 5500. 4400 doesn’t seem that big?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I googled "full sized" so even if it's accurate it's only big cars. Wikipedia says a smart car is 0.73k kg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'87 yota 4x4 p/u 

(2 seats + shit-in-back )

registration scale wt 3047 lb ( assumed "dry") (vin plate max 5080 lb)

+ 153 lb  (17gal fuel,  oil, radiator) ("fudged" for simpler numbers)

3200 lb  

+ 200 lb  (approximate) plate bumper & winch)  (work in process)

3400 lb

Then,  to pack for a week or more in my mountains,

, food & "kitchen" , 5 gal water,  bag & bedding, artillery, extra clothes and "camp stuff"  yada yada

, including the  Dreaded Assault  Folding Lawn Chair  ( with TWO cup holders )   ;) 

600 lb   ( W.A.G ).

4000 pounds of 32 yr old "recycled" truck gets  me in places that ;

(1) I do not think one could land lighter than air craft 

 ( weather/wind variables amplified by steep terrain)

(2) I refuse to get in a rotary craft whose driver plans to land there.  

Same reason, and see the Blackhawk crash on MT Hood video.


The bush plane guys won't have the luxury of steady wind and wide open parking lot approach.

Road is tight enough to require co-operation between vehicles to meet,

Tall trees on both sides of road, or  tall trees on one side and cliff on other

 

B) , I'll pour myself a Cognac, relax in the Assault Chair,  and watch y'all "landing" your flying cars.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so let me get this straight - people aren't flocking to get their pilot licenses because small airplanes are: expensive, complicated, expensive, require certain skills that are hard for some people to get, expensive, noisy, etc. But yeah, flying cars will totally come in to existence. And it'll all be automatic. And the mitochondria will pay for it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

flying " motorcycles"   i guess eventually the fans would be ducted.   theres no coming back from getting off the machine the wrong way...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, mustang__1 said:

so let me get this straight - people aren't flocking to get their pilot licenses because small airplanes are: expensive, complicated, expensive, require certain skills that are hard for some people to get, expensive, noisy, etc. But yeah, flying cars will totally come in to existence. And it'll all be automatic. And the mitochondria will pay for it. 

A disproportionate chunk of Silicon Valley funds/develops stuff that Silicon Valley wants but that few others will buy. A faction outside of Silicon Valley worries that they'll miss out and doesn't have the confidence and/or critical analysis skills to realize this and pours their own resources into the trend.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, IStream said:

A disproportionate chunk of Silicon Valley funds/develops stuff that Silicon Valley wants but that few others will buy. A faction outside of Silicon Valley worries that they'll miss out and doesn't have the confidence and/or critical analysis skills to realize this and pours their own resources into the trend.  

I mostly don't understand the general public's excitement over this shit. If you want to fly, go fly. If you can't afford it or don't want to make the time or monetary sacrifice, then so be it.... but you won't be affording these "flying cars" either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Marcjsmith said:

flying " motorcycles"   i guess eventually the fans would be ducted.   theres no coming back from getting off the machine the wrong way...

 

Pilot not strapped in.   No protection from the blades.

What possibly could go wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, slap said:

Pilot not strapped in.   No protection from the blades.

What possibly could go wrong?

they might survive to procreate? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, slap said:

Pilot not strapped in.   No protection from the blades.

What possibly could go wrong?

They have done dumber things in abu fucking dhabi....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, mustang__1 said:

I mostly don't understand the general public's excitement over this shit. If you want to fly, go fly. If you can't afford it or don't want to make the time or monetary sacrifice, then so be it.... but you won't be affording these "flying cars" either. 

Learner planes aren't cool. Every one likes the idea of flying a warbird. But no one wants to be seen in a 152.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites