Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (
More info?)
On Sun, 22 May 2005 10:27:33 -0300, "MiChAeL" <baaaaa@out-there.net>
wrote:
>
>"Marcel Kuijper" <zoepetier_nothing_here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1iyre683saobd.181065cv3j4od$.dlg@40tude.net...
>> On Thu, 19 May 2005 18:54:22 GMT, Dallas wrote:
>>
>>> Just like the Jetsons...
>>>
>>> 350+ MPH - up to 28 miles per gallon - Ceiling FL30
>>>
>>> http://www.moller.com/skycar/
This car has surfaced about once a year for the last 20 or so, or is
that 50.
So far, it's been nothing more than hype and a sinkhole for investors
money. It has done tethered flight,
However, by the time they add enough redundancy to take care of an
engine failure and then get type acceptance, that will be one very
expensive buggy... IF they ever get it working.
On top of that, "if a miracle happened" and they could make them safe
and inexpensive AND easy to fly AND get the FAA certification you
would see a new type of traffic control.
For one, you can not land any kind of aircraft in most cities except
at an airport or designated landing pad. In many states landing on the
road (intentionally except in an emergency) is not an option either.
Most drivers have enough of a problem with two dimensions, now add a
third. The control would have to be truely automated and that would
be expensive and it would be a liability nightmare.
For a pilot it would be a fantastic piece of equipment albeit
expensive IF they ever make it work and safely. Like cars, gas is the
least expensive part of the cost of operation. Most drivers just
don't realize it.
So, for now it's a great thing to fanaticize about, but completely
impractical and were it made operational today, it could be as much as
20 years before ATC would be able to handle the traffic.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>>
>> It's a bird!
>> It's a plane!
>>
>> It's....an atrocity!
>
>To me, a nice basic ultralight is a realistic alternative to a "flying car,"
>which has forever been trying to get off the ground and has for the most
>part only seen the front covers of Popular Mechanics since the 1950's. If it
>doesn't have efficient wings or a gliding backup, I wouldn't want to be in
>it. If it fails 200 feet up before transition to horizontal flight a
>ballistic chute would barely make it out of the pack before the Moller noses
>in like a lawn dart. Better a short takeoff roll than a zero speed VTOL
>failure. The concept should be kept simple, as in say folding wings or
>helicopter / autogyrolike rotor blades mounted on a lightweight highway
>driveable car body. If the Moller does make it, it would likely only be a
>millionaire's toy anyways, subject to all the high costs of regular
>aircraft. Plus, it seems more like an exotic form of airplane with its
>undercarriage than a car per se. One small wheel in a pothole and ..
With
>a 35mph limited highway speed it won't be much of a highway cruiser.
>
-ydnU5LyvLKmBDfRVn-gA@comcast.com...
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram