
SkyFly - Vertical Takeoff & Landing Ultralight Aircraft - alexkiwi
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1894175451/skyfly-vertical-takeoff-and-landing-ultralight-air?ref=category
======
dminor
From: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiller_VZ-1_Pawnee>

"Due to aerodynamic effects in the duct within which the propellers rotated,
the platform was dynamically stable, even though the pilot and center of
gravity of the platform were fairly high up. In testing, the prototypes flew
well enough, but the U.S. Army judged them to be impractical as combat
vehicles as they were small, limited in speed and only barely flew out of the
ground cushion effect."

Seems like it wouldn't be so great for going over mountains and such.

~~~
alexkiwi
Definitely have to agree with you there. It's not exactly practical, but could
make for a better sport than segway polo.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pld9t19WGSc>

------
mixmax
People have tried to make flying cars since the 60's and yet there has never
been a successful product in the niche.

What people seem to overlook is that making a flying car is easy. Making it so
that the FCC will allow my mom to fly it and land it in her garage is next to
impossible.

If only accredited pilots can buy one the production price won't come down,
and if you can only land and take off from an airport as a pilot in an
expensive flying device, well then you've invented.... a plane...
Congratulations you're competing with Boeing, Gulfstream and Learjet on their
own turf - a highly political arena where money and conections count more than
anything else.

Here's a link to a company that's beeen claiming that their flying car will go
into production next year for the last ten years:
[http://moller.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=arti...](http://moller.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=49&Itemid=57)

~~~
InclinedPlane
Sans magical technology (nanotech perhaps) planes will always be significantly
more expensive than automobiles.

Consider two scenarios. In scenario 1 I buy a beater car and don't maintain
it. What's the worst common scenario that can happen? I end up broken down on
the side of the road. In scenario 2 I buy a beater hover car and don't
maintain it. What's the worst common scenario that can happen? It falls out of
the sky killing all the passengers and possibly people on the ground.

This is why used planes keep their value so well, because every single one of
them must be kept up quite well in order to be flight worthy.

------
angdis
For Christ's sake... live closer to where you work.

~~~
RK
Work from home?

~~~
sp332
Sleep on a cot at work?

------
ndunn2
"Why be stuck in two dimensions when you can fly in three!". I don't know
about the rest of you, but given how awful people drive while constrained to
two dimensions, I'd be truly terrified to see the state of things if travel
like this became ubiquitous.

~~~
Archaeum
Personally, I still hold out hope for cars that can (and are required to)
drive themselves, at least on major roads. Get that figured out, and then we
can talk about flying.

------
anthonycerra
I'm a little disappointed by the cynical comments. This is exactly the type of
innovation we should be encouraging. Dismissing it by saying "It won't work,"
or "It's next to impossible," doesn't help anyone and doesn't move us forward.

------
absconditus
Can we please refrain from using reddit-like headlines?

------
chirp
We have an impending energy crisis and we're dreaming about taking our lazy
asses around in flying car?! Jesus, instead of solving grid lock with fantasy
of everybody flying to work (I'm sure the sky will be cluttered if it's really
affordable to fly, so there goes solving your problem) why don't we
concentrate on creating an efficient public transit system, something that
would save us fossil fuel and help with traffic.

------
malandrew
This video discusses a shortcoming of the Hiller Flying platform right at the
end: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_UtPmb3Z-o>

"Ironically, it was the Hiller Platform's inherent stability that ultimately
killed the project. The problem was that the platform had a tendency to right
itself. Going forward depended on the machine's continued lean in the
direction of flight, but it constantly wanted to straighten up and this made
it almost impossible to maintain a consistent heading"

How do you plan to overcome that shortcoming? Gyroscopes or something?

Also, why does your platform use the slats instead of a cone duct to direct
airflow like the original design?

Other videos:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZmULlkOE3o>
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwhBWxc0SSM>

------
krschultz
"SkyFly is infinitely more stable than any helicopter. Because it is so
stable, SkyFly makes flying much easier for everyone!"

Says the designer about an unbuilt prototype.

You know the V-22 Osprey is "just" two helicopter motors mounted on pins on
the end of a winged prop plane. Freaking simple.

And a rocket motor is just two tanks of propellant pumped through a big blast
proof cone.

Dual counter rotating prop has lower efficiency than a single big prop, it
just doesn't have a net torque on the overall vehicle. I just can't see a 6'
diameter rotor being strong enough to get far off the ground cushion, much
less 2x6' with all the turbulence that comes with it.

~~~
malandrew
Actually if you look at my comment above you'll see that the video I posted
discusses that the problem with the original platform was that it was too
stable.

On the other hand the third video I posted shows a modern miniature version of
the original craft. This modern version isn't nearly as stable looking as the
original. I can only assume that this is either due to it's size or lack of a
duct. My best is on the lack of a duct. That being said, the design for this
kickstarter project uses louvres instead of a duct, so I'm wondering if he can
achieve the stability of the original Hiller Flying Platform.

------
lg
most people who commute by air don't feel like a boss :)

------
guscost
Two issues I could see a problem with:

-As somebody mentioned, these things can't fly that high. Is it going to be dangerous to try to fly it over tall houses or buildings?

-Even if you can get above street level, is the thrust going to, say, ruin your neighbor's garden? You could have a problem with smaller communities banning these, even if it stays legal.

------
SpacemanSpiff
Alternately for the $20,000 he could get an old cessna 172, learn how to
maintain it and get his A&P mechanic license and have a safe and reliable way
to fly during nice weather. Still would need an "airport car" to get to work
from the airport though.

------
elai
Since this would be as exposed, and slower than a powered paraglider, why
doesn't he just use that instead and find a field to land in for work.

------
27182818284
Recall how awful parking lots are in 2D.

Now add a dimension.

Scary, right?

------
maeon3
All money invested in this will be completely wasted. It's a nice dream. But
flying cars the general public can use are at least 20 years away. There needs
to be a completely automated pilot system that protects you from the 10
million things that can go wrong, windstorms, hailstorms, bird hits,
maintenance checks, fuel levels. Pilots get formal educations on how to fly
because one mistake and you die. It is no different with this device.

