Flying Cars And Roadable Aircraft

An overview of current projects - not much technical depth but nice things to look at. A good many are now at the point where their makers are confident enough to put price tags on them. Some even fly.

It's YouTube, so do not read the comments do not read the comments do not read the comments do not read the comments...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIYp62vDtf4
 
An overview of current projects - not much technical depth but nice things to look at. A good many are now at the point where their makers are confident enough to put price tags on them. Some even fly.

It's YouTube, so do not read the comments do not read the comments do not read the comments do not read the comments...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIYp62vDtf4
Have to say... the there's a wide range there. The Terrafugia 'works' but is virtually useless - a terrible car and a terrible plane; the Bellwether screams 'scam' or it's fueled with Kool-Aid (their site calls a subscale drone model a 'prototype'); the PAL-V is an autogyro with a heavy undercarriage that you can drive and may actually be useful.
 
Cutaway Sky Technology "Aircar" the ing retired from Bell Helicopters Kenneth Wernicke working for many years in his own version of Auto Volador, study limitations that made it impractical, decided to design a flying car would not have to undergo the "Surgery" before each flight and after this, as in many other designs of flying cars from Gustave Whitehead (I built the first flying car in history) to Terrafugia, not to mention the dozens of projects that were more or less a success in flying but not so successful in sales, auto flying ones who got the media attention were: Paul Taylor and the Aerocar Airphibian but both had to undergo a conversion according to its makers was very simple "removing a screw here and a pin there, "but it should have a place to store the wings and tail when you were not at home, the project engineer. Kenneth Wernicke instead only had to attach the propeller and find the nearest track to fly, its design was quite simple, but his greatest contribution was those very short span wings with large vertical fins (These help reduce aerodynamic drag and generating the necessary stability) this trait made the Aircar a relatively compact vehicle that could patrol the streets and avenues, its engine a Mazda Wankel modified to fly and this in see moving a hydraulic pump that conveyed by high pressure oil traction to the wheels perfectly faired after huge "Pants" which in turn favored stability and reduced drag only would have two speeds forward and backward, and its top speed of only 110 km / h but the air could fly over 300 km / h, with that engine, its designer argued that more advanced models would use turboprop engines higher power that would allow it to fly at almost 500 km / h, after extensive testing of wind tunnel and compare different models, I build one controlled radio that flew very well in the words of Mr. Wernicke, I manufacture a Mockup of the same demonstration but did not get the interest of investors leaving only a technological promise for the contributions and advances made by Wernicke, author Motocar in a free and highly speculative interpretation of Aircar.
We are developing a similar concept, but with a lot more capability. The vehicle is called the Sky Chaser and looks like an Can-AM race car, has 4 car wheels, flies both vertically and horizontally, and is amphibian. It has no exposed rotors, and no unfolding wings or rotors, and simply flies the way it looks, similar to the flying car in the movie Blade Runner. For more info see the following links:

*Website: http://SkyChaser(dot)se

*Project Presentation: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FAdls15OriuQ4hoD2xPwXeNQDQTKpK1t/view?usp=drive_link

*evtol News article 1: https://evtol.news/sky-chaser-concept-design

*evtol news article 2: https://evtol.news/sky-chaser

*Simulation tests: https://drive.google.com/file/d/19taPDO1yERAumR8OV1IFk2n1TqNLNUkN/view?usp=drive_link

*Full Scale hover test: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qDl5X142uC5yt_5Xcb0GUS3h-LgD4P0V/view?usp=drive_link
 
We are developing a similar concept, but with a lot more capability. The vehicle is called the Sky Chaser and looks like an Can-AM race car, has 4 car wheels, flies both vertically and horizontally, and is amphibian. It has no exposed rotors, and no unfolding wings or rotors, and simply flies the way it looks, similar to the flying car in the movie Blade Runner. For more info see the following links:

*Website: http://SkyChaser(dot)se

*Project Presentation: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FAdls15OriuQ4hoD2xPwXeNQDQTKpK1t/view?usp=drive_link

*evtol News article 1: https://evtol.news/sky-chaser-concept-design

*evtol news article 2: https://evtol.news/sky-chaser

*Simulation tests: https://drive.google.com/file/d/19taPDO1yERAumR8OV1IFk2n1TqNLNUkN/view?usp=drive_link

*Full Scale hover test: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qDl5X142uC5yt_5Xcb0GUS3h-LgD4P0V/view?usp=drive_link
 
Screenshot 2024-09-30 at 12.00.49 PM.png
0_ZMqR2E4s4dZnZ6Cr (1).jpg
I'd settle for just being able to "fly" a few inches above the ground. We'd no longer need expensive paved highways and we'd scoff at roads being covered with snow or water.
 
I'd settle for just being able to "fly" a few inches above the ground. We'd no longer need expensive paved highways and we'd scoff at roads being covered with snow or water.
Erm... what do you think would happens when hovercar start to fly over non-paved roads?

Yeah, they would destroy them by blowing the road surface away very quickly. A non-paved road would be turned into trench by hovercars in a very short time.

Not to mention that slope-climbing ability of hovercars would be very dubious. "Just a few inches over surface" means "not being able to traverse any meaningful slope".
 
Erm... what do you think would happens when hovercar start to fly over non-paved roads?

Yeah, they would destroy them by blowing the road surface away very quickly. A non-paved road would be turned into trench by hovercars in a very short time.

Not to mention that slope-climbing ability of hovercars would be very dubious. "Just a few inches over surface" means "not being able to traverse any meaningful slope".
The hovercraft designers in the 60s had an idea on how to reduce the amount of dust created; labyrinth seals that minimized the loss of air from under the vehicle.
 
Essentially the problem with hover cars:

* They are basically flying turbines, pumping a mighty stream of compressed air downward. If the surface they move on is not hard or liquid, they would just blow it away. Destroying the road, or making a nasty trench in the countryside.

* Everyone around the hovercars would be forced to dealt with HUGE clouds of dust and flying debris, propelled at high speed by comprsssed air. Littering on streets would be major criminal offense.

* There are no practical way to quickly stop the hover car. Since there is little traction, the best driver can do if he need to hit the brakes is to switch off the fans and hope for the best. So the risks associated with driving would be multiplied.

* The reverse of the problem above - is hover car is hit by other car or crashed into something, it would turn into rather unsafe bounce car.
 
* They are basically flying turbines, pumping a mighty stream of compressed air downward. If the surface they move on is not hard or liquid, they would just blow it away. Destroying the road, or making a nasty trench in the countryside.
That's not true. Hovercraft can operate with very low pressure.
* There are no practical way to quickly stop the hover car. Since there is little traction, the best driver can do if he need to hit the brakes is to switch off the fans and hope for the best. So the risks associated with driving would be multiplied.
You can just reverse the fans
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom