Flying Car, Already Cleared For Skies, Now Cleared For Roads Too

from the but-where's-my-flying-car dept

Fri, Jul 8th 2011 1:06am — Mike Masnick

Ah, the cry of we-want-the-future-now folks has been "where's my flying car?" Well, a very simple version of one may finally be coming to market. A year ago, we noted that the Terrafugia Transition "roadable aircraft" had been approved by the FAA for flight as a light sports aircraft (meaning you don't even need a full pilots license). But it apparently took another year for the Transition to get the necessary "exemptions" from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to let the thing go on the road. In case you're wondering why it needed exemptions, the LA Times has the details:

So what kinds of special exemptions does a "roadable aircraft" (best name ever) need? Well, special windows, for one. Regular laminated automotive safety glass is too heavy for the Transition while in the air, and there's always a danger that a bird could fracture it. (Dang birds!) Instead of glass windows, the Transition will use a polycarbonate material less prone to shattering. NHTSA also signed off on the use of special tires.

Now, of course, this isn't really the Jetsons-like vision of the flying car people have talked about for ages. The reason it's called a "roadable aircraft" rather than a "flying car" is that the emphasis here is definitely on the aircraft part, and you still have to take off and land at an airport. It's just that you can drive to and from the airport in the same vehicle. And it'll only set you back $250,000 (about $50,000 more than what was reported last year). By the time it actually hits the market next year, perhaps it'll cost even more.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: flying cars, roadable aircraft, transition
Companies: faa, nhtsa, terrafugia

23 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 8 Jul 2011 @ 1:27am

Why is this article here? It has nothing to do with music piracy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Nicedoggy, 8 Jul 2011 @ 2:22am
  
  Re:
  Maybe because is tech related in a website dedicated to tech things with a focus on jurisprudence but not oblivious to other matters on the field?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The eejit (profile), 8 Jul 2011 @ 2:49am
  
  Re:
  Clue's in the name: Techdirt.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lauriel (profile), 8 Jul 2011 @ 3:11am
  
  Re:
  It's a prelude to the inevitable patent/copyright debacle when person A (makers of the roadable aircraft) sues person B (silly fool who dares to make his/her own version) for infringement.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Groove Tiger (profile), 8 Jul 2011 @ 7:21am
  
  Re:
  Why is this comment here? It has nothing to do with calling people freetards.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gabriel Tane (profile), 8 Jul 2011 @ 3:51am

That was the sound of a thousand insurance actuarial departments collectively facepalming and admitting to themselves they've got to get off their asses and actually come up with insurance and rates for this thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Gabriel Tane (profile), 8 Jul 2011 @ 3:53am
  
  Re: (SMACK)
  --le sigh-- No more posting before coffee... there was supposed to be a subject on the first one, but I wrote it with the "
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Michael, 8 Jul 2011 @ 9:54am
    
    Re: Re: (SMACK)
    Don't feel bad. It also happens if you write
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Gabriel Tane (profile), 8 Jul 2011 @ 3:55am
  
  Re: (SMACK)
  Oh come ON! stupid HTML. it just ate half my prior comment just like the first subject. Coffee time.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
killscar (profile), 8 Jul 2011 @ 6:04am

Oh joy...
I can't wait to read about the stupid things that people do with this. Texting while landing, see how many college kids we can pack into a car/plane/car. I am all giggly with excitement!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 8 Jul 2011 @ 6:41am
  
  Re: Oh joy...
  Except not. This thing is an airplane first and a car second.
  That means you have to have a small aircraft pilot's license to be able to do anything in the air with this thing.
  
  With the amount of time, cost, and effort it takes to get a pilot's license, as well as the cost of the roadable aircraft itself, you can be sure everything you just listed off is not going to happen.
  
  Enjoy the shattering of your dreams.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - killscar (profile), 8 Jul 2011 @ 6:54am
    
    Re: Re: Oh joy...
    Buzzkill!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - mattarse (profile), 8 Jul 2011 @ 7:35am
    
    Re: Re: Oh joy...
    According to sportpilot.org it's only $3-5000 and 20 hours of time in the US.
    
    Yeah it sounds like alot but I live in the Czech Republic where it takes around $1000 and I think (not sure of the exact time) 40 hours of driving to get a car license.
    
    So to me this looks extremely reasonable :)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - killscar (profile), 8 Jul 2011 @ 8:10am
    
    Re: Re: Oh joy...
    I sat back and thought about how naive your response to my light-hearted comment was and I briefly hesitated posting this as I don't want to get into an argument but I couldn't resist. You are overlooking a few factors... 1) Theft, I'm sure there will be instructions on the web on how to hotwire one of these bad boys. I'm sure somebody with flight simulator will think thatthey can give this thing a whirl.
    
    2) Rich kids not appreciating the value of daddy's dollar. You are assuming that everyone will be doing what they are supposed to be doing. We all know what happen when you assume.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - killscar (profile), 8 Jul 2011 @ 8:12am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Oh joy...
      Darn it. Should have re-read before posting. Sorry for the typos.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 8 Jul 2011 @ 9:50am
    
    Re: Re: Oh joy...
    You're just mad because your mom will have to lose 500 lbs to fit in one.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - killscar (profile), 8 Jul 2011 @ 10:31am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Oh joy...
      Ooooh, a fat mom joke, how witty. Well, my dad can beat up your dad!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Joe, 8 Jul 2011 @ 7:07am

They forgot to get a designer to work with them. Interesting but hella-ugly. I can't see this competing with the Icon A5. That was designed by an F-16 pilot and a skateboarder and is also 'roadable', as in you can pull it on a trailer like a boat and also park it in the driveway. But it has the advantage of being dead sexy and half the price.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMMm_MczGL0
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Disclosure, 8 Jul 2011 @ 7:10am

Zero Point Energy
We could be using zero point energy to "fuel" flying cars, among other things, but that makes too much sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jacob Cooper (profile), 8 Jul 2011 @ 9:40am

The TSA has already begun a feasibility study to determine how best to place agents to inspect each car owner before they take to the skies. This will be a boon for the scatter imaging manufactures as each household will be required to purchase, maintain and staff each scanner.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- JB, 8 Jul 2011 @ 10:15am
  
  Re:
  Please, don't give them ideas...they'll use them and never pay you a dime!!!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
btr1701 (profile), 8 Jul 2011 @ 10:22am

Airports
> you still have to take off and land at an airport

Why? You don't even have to take off and land at an airport in an actual *airplane*. People fly out of their own property all the time-- crop dusters, private planes landing in fields and on dirt roads, etc.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Jul 2011 @ 1:48pm

Oops. Even though the NHTSA approved it does not mean it is going anywhere.
Each state has its own requirements.
Also, how is a state going to know how to tax this thing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]