The PAL-V Flying Car: It`s Maiden Flight

Submitted by: piperfawn 4 years ago

Dreams do come true.
There are 48 comments:
Female 1,894
CCCCCCCCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLL
0
Reply
Male 592
would be awesome if they where for general retail :D
0
Reply
Male 2,859
Bottom line - you`ve seen the dicks that drive BMWs and Audis - would you let them loose in a helicopter?
0
Reply
Male 1,048
great thing for fly bys. bet the mexican drug cartel would invest on that ;)
0
Reply
Male 5
As a car it`ll make a great Gyro, as a gyro, it`ll make a great car. Make something to do two things, it`ll be mediocre at both.
0
Reply
Male 182
@mcboozerilla
go and learn what makes gyrocopters "good", its not a new concept but better than any competitors ive seen
0
Reply
Male 1,511
So many haters here (probably from people who`ve never created anything useful in their lives, and never will). This design is great, and an incredible feat.
0
Reply
Male 646
Yeah, well, good luck finding investors for THAT.
0
Reply
Male 687
yes...thats what we all need...some drunk redneck flying over our heads >< no thank you
0
Reply
Male 116
Flying Car? No.

Drivable Gyro? Maybe.

Show me 1 car that looks like that...

Anyways, this inconvenient unpractical device doesnt really correspond to by back-to-the-future type boyhood fantasies. At all. Maybe it can have some obscure industrial or military use in sparesely populated flatlands. Mongolia or something. Looks kinda cool inits own way, but doesnt look like much fun to drive it.
0
Reply
Male 14,773
If you`re serious about this, you`re better off with a R22 and find a way to stow a folding motorbike. Then you can put down in a small field. Gyros T/O, fly and land more like fixed wing aircraft. VTOL is not just about convenience, it`s about finding somewhere to autorotate to in an emergency in urban areas.
0
Reply
Male 3,577
want to see the real flying car look up
skycar m400
0
Reply
Male 14,773
@LordJim no you wouldn`t need a dedicated crew. Take it to any certified aviation mechanic. Then pay through the nose.

No you wouldn`t need an airfield. It should have soft field take off capability. You would need to recce the landing field for even ground, sufficient length and take off height clearance, plus check noise abatement regs and airspace. But you can`t T/O and land from roads, certainly not in most places.
0
Reply
Male 2,670
Should be "Its maiden flight," not "it`s maiden flight." No apostrophe.

0
Reply
Male 7,123
Wouldn`t you need a full time maintenance crew? And wouldn`t most urban areas ban them from airspace because of the risk of plummeting whirling rotors on Main Street?

Also, wouldn`t you need to get to a designated take-off/landing areas which would probably miles from your destination. Why not just get a helicopter and hire a car at the far end?

A nice exercise and no doubt a lot of technical problems were tackled, but not commercially viable.
0
Reply
Male 153
I remember watching a black and white "in the future" commercial of a woman going to the grocery in the family gyrocopter; obviously from the 50`s. It isn`t practical and anyone that invests in this company would be better off "investing" at a blackjack table; it has better odds.
0
Reply
Male 616
How`s the side impact test from an SUV. Seriously, we already have people running into each other on the ground. And now they`re gonna be dropping from the sky?....Great.
0
Reply
Male 226
@Draculya u go in so much trouble for nothing. they will not put this thing in any kind of production because ppl will get killed and kill 100 more with them, just because ppl are stupid. to my eyes it is a very good excersise of mechanics and i really like it!
0
Reply
Male 2,514
What Wallodude said...
0
Reply
Male 380
That not a flying car, it`s a helicopter that, uselessly, can be driven on the road....
0
Reply
Male 25,416
Im thinking April Fools.....
0
Reply
Male 14,773
PS god (lol) forbid the wind is blowing in the wrong direction, then your trip is going to be really long.

Few gyros are much faster than 100kts. A gyro of this configuration will probably only do 45 kts. There is a real risk of negative groundspeed, which is really bad.
0
Reply
Male 14,773
Let`s say your commute takes 90 mins and average speed is 30mph. 45 miles. Your light/UL aircraft can do 80 kts and can fly the trip in 30 mins, but you need to add a minimum of 45 mins for preflight including weather briefing, flight plan, fueling, sign out, check. 15 mins to taxi out, control check, run up and get PTO. Add 10 mins for entering and flying the pattern, landing and taxi then 10 mins to secure the a/c (or convert it to a car). This is bare minimum at a private strip, not a commercial airport. That`s 2 hours already, not counting the time it takes you to get to and from the airstrip.

BTW, a R22 can run about $300 per hour, mostly due to insurance and maintenance, calculated on engine hours which determines the maintenance cycle. If you ran the motor to commute to the shops or airstrip, you`d pay that cost even driving on the ground.
0
Reply
Male 14,773
"I think the "closed cabin" makes it a car, not a motorcycle."

Not according to the UK`s DVLA. 3 wheels means you can drive it on either a bike or car license.

I hold various pilot`s licenses and ratings and I don`t think ultralights are the way forward for alleviating traffic congestion.

Noise abatement.
Need for an approved landing strip in an urban area.
Low density of aircraft in a given airspace.
Legal risk of compliance; likelihood of incursion.
Troublesome travel from airstrip to destination.
Properties that make for a practical car do not make for a practical aircraft.
Limited range.
High cost of aircraft, insurance, certification and maintenance.
0
Reply
Male 74
Flying cars have been around since the 1930s. It`s never been a matter of technology, but of practicality.
0
Reply
Male 2,592
Not going to catch on, not ever.
0
Reply
Female 6,381
#SlothOfDoom
Yeah, do let us know when one of those Moller machines gets off the ground, won`t you Sloth?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
I doubt if flying cars will be here any time soon, other than in the same way as microlights already are. Given how congested the roads are and how often there are traffic accidents, any country would be insane to allow flying cars as vehicles for routine use. I`m not just talking about serious traffic accidents - any minor bump or scrape would almost certainly be fatal for both parties in flying cars and would quite likely be fatal for people on the ground below too. If two flying cars fall into a town after a collision, there`s a good chance of some more people dying.
0
Reply
Female 500
I love holland ♥ we have a Dutch Vogue, and now a flying car. What more could you want?
0
Reply
Male 2,033
Not nearly as impressive as the Moller Skycars, but whatever
0
Reply
Male 2,344
So many 18 year old jackasses inbound...

"Dude lets fly around the highway and play chicken!"
0
Reply
Male 1,083
problem is still energy...
0
Reply
Male 36,388
[quote]but isn`t this an autogyro as opposed to a helicopter??[/quote]
@nettech98: true enough, but most folks consider them the same thing, eh?
If the "wings" spin around to give it lift? "Helicopter".
0
Reply
Male 36,388
[quote]Just a nit, but I think in most places it would be considered a motorcycle (3 wheels).[/quote]
True enough @PldFrt, but I think the "closed cabin" makes it a car, not a motorcycle.
Car:

Motorcycle:

See?
0
Reply
Male 1,053
Correct me if I`m wrong, but isn`t this an autogyro as opposed to a helicopter??
0
Reply
Male 15,510
Dear Santa
0
Reply
Male 14,773
@piperfawn "i think that PAL-V is better for VTOL cause is more like an helicopter." no gyrocopter can VTOL. "this is just a prototype" it`s CG. Certainly a lot of that was CG.
0
Reply
Male 749
Just a nit, but I think in most places it would be considered a motorcycle (3 wheels). Still way cool though, and $200K really isn`t that far off from normal small airplane costs. Not sayin` it`s cheap, but it`s not out of reach for most airplane buyers.
0
Reply
Male 36,388
@piperfawn I don`t think "running cost" will matter when there`s a $200K price tag. Do owners care what mileage a Lamboughini gets?

Helicopters are VTOL, but there`s VSTOL (very SHORT take-off or landing) which could also be viable...
0
Reply
Male 5,006
5Cats i think that PAL-V is better for VTOL cause is more like an helicopter. Anyway also Terrafugia is not bad cause have more space inside and maybe can carry also a passenger. The problem is... how many fuel you need for this apparels?
0
Reply
Male 5,006
EgalM you are right, but this is just a prototype. Maybe they will develop one model for multi passengers.
0
Reply
Male 36,388
Excellent!
@xiquiripat: your link is also Excellent!

But the future "flying car" needs to be VTOL (vertical take-off or landing) for big-city use.

idk if either of these cut the mustard, but there`s hope for the future!
0
Reply
Male 10,440

0
Reply
Male 1,737
Yeah, but what if the off chance I`m married with kids and need to move some cargo? Seems like a toy more than a useful tool. Sure it`d great for business men, but that`s about it.
0
Reply
Male 412
LOL! At 1:08, he says "The next step will be the design of the..." just as the vehicle was landing.

I was bracing for him to finish it with "... landing systems," then seeing it crash.
0
Reply
Male 341
that is the sickest thing ever!
0
Reply
Male 2,422
So this or the Terrafugia?
0
Reply
Male 5,006
Link: The PAL-V Flying Car: It`s Maiden Flight [Rate Link] - Dreams do come true.
0
Reply