
Flying Cars Get OK From Department of Transportation - sliggity
http://bostinnovation.com/2011/07/05/flying-cars-get-ok-from-department-of-transportation/
======
Zak
Why is polycarbonate not allowed for ordinary cars? It seems like it would
accomplish the same goal as automotive safety glass, namely preventing
injuries from sharp shards of glass in a collision.

~~~
rfreytag
Polycarbonate is not used widely because is VERY expensive to fit and replace.
My glider canopy is $5000 replaced: <http://www.mikeash.com/my_glider.html>
(ask me how I know).

Note even the canopy for the ancient but popular ASK-13 is over $2000 on this
site: <http://www.wingsandwheels.com/glider_canopies.htm>

Installing these babies is really tricky. Nothing ever fits quite right from
the factory. Worth another $3000 easy in labor; after all it is an aircraft.

~~~
Zak
I'm not asking why it isn't widely used. I'm asking why it's apparently
forbidden by law or regulation, requiring an exemption for the application
described in the original post.

------
ben1040
They had one of these parked at the Google I/O after-party this year.

From looking at it -- specifically, that big wing where you'd normally expect
a bumper on a car -- it made me wonder what would happen to the aerodynamic
profile of the car if it got the sort of usual dents and dings a car gets.

I know my car accumulated a few of them before I even made the first payment.
Would something like that have the potential of rendering it unairworthy?

~~~
barefoot
(pilot) Probably wouldn't be significant. If you go walk around at an airfield
you'll notice all types of similar imperfections on airplanes and they still
fly perfectly fine and are classified as airworthy.

There are a few exceptions (propeller, cracks, etc...) but planes are a lot
more forgiving to surface deformities than you would imagine.

------
seanwoods
Misleading headline. The DOT only approved one of the components, not the
whole thing.

------
hugs
I'm surprised the Maverick wasn't mentioned yet in the comments here. It looks
far more fun and durable than the other flying car designs out there:
<http://mavericklsa.com/>

------
tectonic
Video of their test model in flight:
<http://www.terrafugia.com/Flight_1146.html>

------
TheIronYuppie
This will be interesting ... lots of things (prisons, nuclear power plants,
the White House) are built with the assumption that the average person can't
just fly something over a 18-foot high razor wire fence. Wonder how people are
going to deal with the fact that many security measures are now significantly
reduced in effectiveness.

~~~
gvb
Never say never but, WRT nuclear power plants...

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Containment_building>

"In 1988, Sandia National Laboratories conducted a test of slamming a jet
fighter into a large concrete block at 481 miles per hour (775 km/h). The
airplane left only a 2.5-inch-deep (64 mm) gouge in the concrete. Although the
block was not constructed like a containment building missile shield, it was
not anchored, etc., the results were considered indicative. A subsequent study
by EPRI, the Electric Power Research Institute, concluded that commercial
airliners did not pose a danger."

WRT prisons, landing with an airplane is going to be challenging (minimum
landing distance is 500m) and taking off is likely impossible (minimum take-
off distance is 520m[1]). Given the improbability of leaving the prison, it
will be a self-correcting issue. ;-)

[1] [http://www.aircraftcompare.com/helicopter-
airplane/Terrafugi...](http://www.aircraftcompare.com/helicopter-
airplane/Terrafugia-Transition/289)

~~~
wlievens
People simply use helicopters to escape from prison:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_helicopter_prison_escap...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_helicopter_prison_escapes)

------
angdis
If they ever ship, I expect the market to be squarely in the "playthings-for-
the-wealthy" category.

This thing just does not solve any real problem other than gadget-lust.

------
bmelton
This is huge news for Moller and ilk. I know Moller's been working on the
'flying car' idea for what seems like forever now (having built working
prototypes in the 60s or 70s), and from what I've seen, the Moller Skycar at
least SEEMS to be the closest thing I've seen to a feasible product.

~~~
btilly
Have you seen [http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/news/vintage-
speed/mave...](http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/news/vintage-
speed/maverick-flying-car-now-legal)? I think it is feasible.

~~~
Wingman4l7
I always thought this was cheating a bit -- it's just an extra-large PPG
(powered paraglider) with a dune buggy attached instead of a trike. When I
hear "flying car", I usually think of some type of fixed-wing aircraft.

~~~
btilly
It is cheating, but what works, works. :-)

~~~
Wingman4l7
Yes, sometimes the simplest solutions are the best :)

