SKYAID
New
Mission
Overview
Details
Medical
Watch
Heart attack
Stroke
World health
Emergency
Cost effective
Media
- Site Map
SKYCAR
Details
Overview
VTOL
Airline
Military
Transportation
Images
- Site
Map
Search
Translate
8
languages
Total cost of all stages: No direct experience to estimate from
The cost of developing a Skycar and making the production facilities for an electronically piloted vehicle appears to fall between $1.5 billion and $5 billion - projects of similar complexity at Boeing, the Space Station and the 777 airplane, suggest that approximately $3 billion of funding will be needed.
The Skycar project could have a much lower cost because it will be an integrated evolutionary design - by having about 50 times fewer people and parts to coordinate than a typical Boeing aircraft, it can have rapid prototyping and testing as well as using more innovative technology.
Or the Skycar project could have a higher cost because the design and manufacturing groups may not have the needed experience with composites, small aircraft, integrated design, software design - there may also be political delays in some countries, such as the US, plus additional costs in setting up ground controllers and integration with existing air transportation systems.
Risks
Primary risks to high volume development would include difficulty in completing the systems for electronic piloting. Weight and complexity of the avionics may require further development.
Other risks of development include inability to sufficiently abate noise inside and outside the aircraft, early phase safety and comfort, and FAA reluctance to make the appropriate changes (in the US).
Another concern is the reliability of the thrust deflection system - this is about the only weakness in the Skycar's otherwise elegant design - the constant motion of the deflection vanes to provide a smooth ride in turbulent conditions could necessitate a redesign for added strength.
There is a risk during development from potential competitors who have studied the Moller design. Patents provide reasonable protection.
Competition
While other inventors have come up with VTOL designs, none of the other designs are practical enough to be considered as competition to the Skycar - they all have too many flight critical parts, fly too slowly, consume too much fuel, and have other limitations.
Current competitors don't have the patented engine technology, redundancy, aerodynamic stability, avionics, safety backups, noise abatement, low fuel consumption, electronic piloting, and many other features needed to make a vehicle of this type practical.
How Did the Competition Stack Up? (need to update) |
|||
| M400
Skycar (Moller) |
Sky Commuter |
Car
Plane |
|
| Can it still fly when an engine dies? | Yes |
No |
No |
| Does design utilize aerodynamic lift for fuel economy? | Yes |
No |
Yes |
| Can it be used at night, and in poor weather? | Yes |
No |
No |
| Is it independent of special ground facilities, e.g. airports? | Yes |
No |
No |
| Will it be free from unacceptable air and noise pollution? | Yes Yes |
No No |
Yes No |
| Will it be safer than auto? | Yes |
No |
No |
To give just one example - stable, controlled flight using multiple engines with vectored thrust in vertical, horizontal, and transitional modes, and in all weather conditions, is not easy to achieve - a major national laboratory, after seeing an earlier Moller design, tried and failed to make one that could fly.
Paul Moller has overcome the difficulties, through 25 years of experience and building numerous working models - competitors have simply not had Moller's experience and dedication to the task.
Technical feasibility
Moller spent 10 years developing a powerful, lightweight rotary engine that is efficient and low cost - 2 horsepower per pound at a cost of $50 per horsepower - this development was so successful, Moller has spun off a separate engine company to market these engines for other applications.
During the initial investigation of the Skycar, Boeing was concerned that its small wings would not have sufficient aerodynamic lift - however, after further study, Boeing concluded that the Moller design provides more than adequate lift - 75% of its lift derives from the shape of the nacelles and body.
The Skycar is unique in being able to exploit electronic piloting - it has a low aspect ratio (is minimally affected by downdrafts), no external moving parts, an extremely fast response propulsion system, is not required to be compatible with previous piloted aircraft, has adequate on-board computer power, sufficient communications and sensors, and is a small enough vehicle to allow short design cycles.
Although the M-400 Skycar has not yet completed an initial flight test, engineers from Boeing, McDonnell Douglas, and NASA are confident that it will fly - a previous model, the Moller 200, has successfully completed 200 flights.
Figure caption for translation: Skycar gets lift from entire vehicle. Square feet of lift surface: 12 from each front nacelle, 15 from each rear nacelle, 15 from each wing, and 42 from the body.