Are you ready for the SkyCar?

 By Alice Hill  http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2760468,00.html

ZDNet News  May 15, 2001 5:23 AM PT

Here's why automobile technology is more a frustration than a turn-on. What other machine can do a head-snapping 140 mph but sits idling in traffic most of the time, and then when traffic is not part of the equation, earns you a pricey speeding ticket after you sample a little engineering progress? That's why this century I'm looking up for answers. Up, as in the flying car.

Believe it or not, the flying car is not that far away. Paul Moller, head of Moller International and developer of the Moller SkyCar has been working for over 30 years on passenger vehicle that will take off vertically, travel at 350mph as far as 900 miles on a single tank of gas, and park in your own garage. Moller has built a prototype of the SkyCar that is nearing its first test certification flight and may someday soon be available for sale to the public at what he imagines will be in the range of most high-end luxury vehicles ($80,000-$100,000.)

Technically speaking, Moller's SkyCar is a "volantor," which is defined as "a vertical takeoff and landing aircraft that is capable of flying in a quick, nimble, and agile manner." Volantors work much like the British Harrier Jump Jet. They use a directional thrust system that lets the vehicle take off and land vertically, hover in place, or shoot forward by redirecting the thrust of the engine. This gives the volantor the flexibility of a helicopter without losing the fast speed of a high-performance aircraft.

Fun for four My favorite, the M400 four-seater version of the SkyCar--uses eight rotary engines encased in four housing units called nacelles. A nacelle holds two engines to provide a back up in case of failure, giving the SkyCar the ability to sustain normal flight even after an engine fails. The SkyCar is also equipped with a parachuting system that will bring the entire vehicle down safely in the event of a catastrophic multi-engine failure. Extremely safety conscious, Moller designed also the SkyCar with two back up computers to support the primary on-board computer in case of a malfunction.

So when will we be happily volanting about instead of inhaling exhaust fumes in traffic? Depends on the FAA and NASA. The SkyCar is designed to be operated from small airports, as well as what Moller calls "vertiports," which he imagines being built near shopping centers and on skyscraper rooftops. A driver will need a FAA certified pilot's license to operate a SkyCar, but little has been decided on what rules apply to these vehicles once airborne. As a reader once wrote to me, "Do I have to worry about an idiot neighbor coming home drunk and crashing into my roof?"

 Hurry up and wait NASA is currently spearheading project that would use computer-guided, GPS directioned flight plans to give drivers a simple way to punch in their destination and then simply ride to their location without physically "driving" a SkyCar. Meanwhile, Moller's SkyCar is still "priced" at about $500,000--half off last year's $1,000,000 price tag--but a long way from competing with a new Lexus. It's safe to say that the next decade will be full of early flight demonstrations and some military and commercial trial use, but it may be an additional decade before the technology is affordable enough for consumer use.

 While we cool our heels waiting, here are some online resources to keep tabs on:

 - - -a few of the many comments to the article follow - - - -

Occupation: curmudgeon  What makes you so sure that the stultifying ground traffic laws will not be "ported" to the air? When you get to the same traffic density in the air as you have on the ground now, you'll have the same conditions. Would you want the jerks that are on the road today, up in the air tomorrow (where they can do damage in 3 dimensions rather than 2)?

Name: Robert Carnegie Email: robert.carnegie@seemis.com Location: Glasgow, Scotland Occupation: Technical Programmer  Of the two, CityHawk has the Wright name, but neither one looks like a flier to me. The CityHawk looks like a hairdryer, actually. 
I'd certainly be impressed if either can achieve reasonable fuel consumption compared to a regular car. (I doubt that that 900 mile tank is filled with regular gasoline.) But if they can do it, then with that _and_ NASA autopilot, this might even be cooler than a scooter. 
Come to think, we never did find out what Codename Ginger really is, did we? 
Personally, I'd rather see the fully automatic car, so that I can catch up with my reading - or browse ZDNet.com, of course - at a nice, safe 55 miles an hour.  Now, what does the rest of the Internet have to say about flying cars? Plenty - as I'm sure you know. The hits I just got from Google.com include Moller, CityHawk, and... http://www.retrofuture.com/flyingcar.html . In 1947, "The ConvAIRCAR was not the first flying car to make it to the drawing board. That honor goes to the Curtiss Autoplane of 1917." That's "_to_ the drawing board", but this thing was actually built and flown at the time - but not for long. It looks like a joke, but it isn't; the wings come off, the engine nacelle stays on. Star Trek fans might buy one just to be entitled to say "nacelle", although it sure as heck doesn't _look_ Star Trek.  And it's legal to build your own aeroplane, of course, as long as it's airworthy.  My all-time favourite unusual sight on the road, however, is an Austin Mini I once saw that had a enormous key sticking out of the trunk and turning round and round.

Name: Daren Location: Occupation: Electrical Engineer  Um, actually Bruce, NASA has verified the physics and design of the car as being sound, and as I recall from a few years back, is an investor/developer. 
Now, having said that, you could also argue NASA is the group who voted in favor of the failed shuttle replacement which was the most unlikely, unproven design out of three submitted. Half the technology didn't even exist, or construction processes. 
This car, however, I'd bank on seeing in the next 5-10 years. As far as sales to the general public, that's...well, let's just say, extremely doubtful. We've yet to install cheap, reliable systems in cars that can comply with other traffic, laws, pedestrians, etc., and get us from point A to B without human intervention. You're not going to see this car other than as potential military vehicle and showoff piece.

Name: Michael W. Email: Location: PA Occupation: gearhead  Moller has been around for a long long time and they have working prototypes of this car (they've demonstrated them working on numerous occasions). Moller is hardly a "schlock" -- eccentric maybe, but a bright engineer none-the-less. 
It does work, and there's nothing wrong with the "physics". The only problem with them is the price and the fact that you have to have a pilots license. Currently, it nothing more than a rich mans novelty. 
The only reason I've ever paid attention to Moller was because I've always been fascinated by rotary engines. (admittedly, I'd hate to blow 8 apex seals on a Moller, blowing one on an Rx7 is bad enough)  

Name: freehand  I don't believe I know anyone truly competent to drive on the ground (including me), let alone fly. But that's what radar and computers are for. I predict that, flying or not, my great-grandchildren will not trust any vehicle driven by a human. (Hacker teen rebels in coming decades will disable their CPUs and drive their cars themselves. Whee!) I don't understand the engineering issues (seems like an awful lot of energy to pick something up & move it around rather than just push it), but stupid drivers are a trivial obstacle.

Name: Greg.  If personal vehicle traffic can't be managed in two dimensions, how can anyone believe that it can be managed in three? There would have to be "no-fly zones" in heavily populated areas, which would make the whole exercise rather pointless I think.

Name: Michael Wacey Email: MichaelWacey@email.msn.com   Philadelphia  Occupation: System Integrator
I imagine that all the negative comments about not wanting flying cars were said about the original cars. 
After all if you ride a horse, who would want a noisy car coming by and spooking it.
I actually think it may be easier to automate driving of a flying car that a ground car. 
This is because you have fewer constraints on your motion.
If it does not take more energy to get from point A to point B, we will see flying cars some day.

Name: Charlie Luce Jr. Email: LuceJr@encompasserve.org   Pasadena, CA  Occupation: System Admin
Another project of this general type, well worth checking out, is the SoloTrek and DuoTrek projects from Millenium Jet; the website is http://www.solotrek.com  and they've managed to get NASA and DARPA interested, at least.

Name: Henry Lahore Email: hlahore@skyaid.org   Seattle  Occupation: Engineer
Best possibility for flight without airports.
There are many candidate aircraft which will provide flight without airports. After a very detailed analysis I decided that Skycar is the best. I intend Skyaid.org to have Skycars respond to life-threatening emergencies around the world - saving 100,000 lives per year.
My employer is finally evaluating the vehicle and the market.

Name: Gerald Askew Email: GacresRlty@aol.com   New York  Occupation: Real Estate Developer
I think this is very possible (although most people have such small vision of themselves an there surroundings). If you think back I'm sure the WRIGHT BROTHERS heard the same stuff. and then ended up getting something bigger in the sky because its very possible that the military has such a CAR already. no wonder they say air is the safest way to travel.

Name: Andy Warren  Location: New York  Occupation: High Tech Inventor (Brain Surgeon)
I see from reading a majority of the posts, there are many dangerous and ignorant people who need to stay far away from such a great concept as a sky car.
This is wonderful invention and I plan on being one of the first on my block to have such a toy!
People never change. They always open up their mouths and spout off about stuff they know nothing about. 
If idiots like this were EVER listened to, we still all believe the earth was flat and I'd be headed out to hunt a beast for my breakfast.   
Duh  - Fly on and God Bless!  - Andy
P.S. mass market... a market only exists if there are educated buyers.
This has nothing to do with the fact a car can fly.

Name: Jim McCormick   Florida  Occupation: Computer Consultant
I've read a lot of comments like "not in my lifetime" and "that's impossible". 
I remember thinking the same thing watching television back in the mid 70's. 
I was only about 10 years old and I saw a news piece on the "COMPUTER" and how everyone would have one in their home!
My mother and I laughed.   (I would say probably a lot like you're all laughing right now...)  
Jim   PS. I'd like you to all to notice that I'm now a computer consultant. I make good money off that "joke".