15 hours ago, Chock said:

Not this claptrap again. Why do people actually keep trying to invent one of these things? They might just as well try combining a camera with a kettle for all the use these things are ever going to see. What part of this don't they understand: If you can afford to spend 1.3 million dollars, you can afford a Cessna and a BMW, so why would you want one toy which was inferior to both of those two toys?

Because this would be way cooler than any Cessna or BWM, it’s really not hard to figure out. I would totally get something like this if it hit the market developed and I had the cash. Just because it would be awesome. Everything doesn’t have to be 100% practical to be appreciated, they’re toys. This toy would be totally fun. And just as an observation no small single engine airplane is really practical for anything but $100 hamburgers if you want to be honest. Sure you can fly long trips but it sucks. By your logic what possible purpose is there for a 172 when a 210 goes faster and farther with three times the load? Just enjoy these things for what they are. 😉

41 minutes ago, Rbass said:

Because this would be way cooler than any Cessna or BWM, it’s really not hard to figure out. I would totally get something like this if it hit the market developed and I had the cash. 😉

In the same article where it stated the price tag, it stated they had 30 orders and was planned to hit the market in 2021 (if memory serves me correctly). For the life of me, I can’t find that article 😞

17 hours ago, Chock said:

 If you can afford to spend 1.3 million dollars, you can afford a Cessna and a BMW, so why would you want one toy which was inferior to both of those two toys?

I’d have to agree. The novelty is cool but with the cost of 1.3 million dollars, I’d rather have a nice plane and a nice car, separately. Besides the fact, it’s not like you’d want to be driving that thing around town on a regular basis anyway. If you have the budget for that, certainly you could afford to fly your own plane somewhere and rent a car when you arrrive.

20 hours ago, Chock said:

Not this claptrap again. Why do people actually keep trying to invent one of these things? They might just as well try combining a camera with a kettle for all the use these things are ever going to see. What part of this don't they understand: If you can afford to spend 1.3 million dollars, you can afford a Cessna and a BMW, so why would you want one toy which was inferior to both of those two toys?

That's similar to what was said when the cell phone was first introduced. 

2 hours ago, signmanbob said:

That's similar to what was said when the cell phone was first introduced. 

No, it really isn't. Nobody had any objections to the cell phone concept because it is inherently a useful thing as we know. It had been desired for many years prior to it being technically possible.

The cellular concept for a phone system was demonstrated for the first time in 1973, but producing cell phones themselves only became practicable in the early 1980s, when mosfet technology, which had also sparked the arrival of things such as digital watches, pocket calculators and cheaper personal computers as a result of spin-off technology from the space race, enabled the desire for such a thing to match the practical possibility of making one.

Prior to this, Bell's mobile phone system had been around since 1946. That system operated for over 30 years in the US prior to cell phones being made workable, proving how desirable it was conceptually to have an unlimited-range mobile communication system for fleet vehicles, and especially if it could be made cheaper. So there was never any objection to cellular phones at all when they were introduced, except perhaps to the initial cost of them (the Dynatac from Motorola cost nearly four grand in 1983); but they were always seen as something we would want and there was always a desire for them.

You only have to look at how many morons there are driving on the roads to know that being able to produce a reasonably functional car which can convert into an aeroplane, whilst being interesting from a technology standpoint, is never going to be a practical proposition. It will not be until it could perhaps be incorporated into an autonomous system and be capable of vertical take offs and landings and be economical to fuel, such as we see in fictional movies like Blade Runner, that it might be workable. And we are a long way from this being even remotely possible.

Edited November 1, 20205 yr by Chock

11 hours ago, cmpbellsjc said:

Besides the fact, it’s not like you’d want to be driving that thing around town on a regular basis anyway.

Imagine if the user did treat it like a normal car, driving it around for weeks with just the basic fluid level and tyre checks. Then went to an airfield to fly.... would that be possible? To expect the aeroplane part to work, just like that?

7 hours ago, Chock said:

 

You only have to look at how many morons there are driving on the roads to know that being able to produce a reasonably functional car which can convert into an aeroplane, whilst being interesting from a technology standpoint, is never going to be a practical proposition. It will not be until it could perhaps be incorporated into an autonomous system and be capable of vertical take offs and landings and be economical to fuel, such as we see in fictional movies like Blade Runner, that it might be workable. And we are a long way from this being even remotely possible.

Still doesn’t get it. 😉

1 hour ago, Rbass said:

Still doesn’t get it. 😉

I don't know about that: There ARE many vehicle drivers out there who are morons and who happen to have the magnitude of disposable income to spend on such a toy.

52 minutes ago, HighBypass said:

I don't know about that: There ARE many vehicle drivers out there who are morons and who happen to have the magnitude of disposable income to spend on such a toy.

There’s also a lot of airplane owners out there who are morons with disposable income to afford private jets. Trust me, they’re frighteningly and dangerously inept. Pushing the boundaries of what is possible, regardless of those factors, or even practicality is the very definition of innovation. It’s what expands our limitations, and thankfully there are people like this company out there with the ability and drive to make a concept like this one a reality. Imagine if no one ever put the effort into developing things because other people didn’t see a practical use, or just kept stating reasons not to try. Innovation is what advances our civilization and quality of life, and without innovators we’d be nowhere.

As for this concept, no, flying cars will not revolutionize the way we move about. But that doesn’t mean for an instant no one should try to develop the concept. There will be a market for these things, even if just another rich guy toy. For me, I’m all for seeing people expand the realm of what is possible, and this one is super cool. I want one. 😄

Edited November 1, 20205 yr by Rbass