![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I wonder how many times the Wright Brothers heard this statement or
something like it. I agree the challenges are great and his statement ignores many engineering issues that are required for adding additional weight to the airplane (i.e. Additional wing area required, Addtional structure required, the Addtional weight of these additional structures) I can come up with many well reasoned and logical reasons why it won't work. I think the Wright brothers were probably in the same boat when they started, But their greatest acheivement was their ability to solve difficult problems and question and attempt to prove or disprove all the known issues. They started off with little understanding of engineering and design (related to aircraft) and were clueless as to the what it would take to acheive flight, So they taught themselves in a way that no one else had and as result were successful. I remember when the Rubik's cube 1st came out I had no Idea how it could do what they it did. After I had disassembled it it seemed easy. I am careful to tell people what the can't do, while most will fail. A few are just clueless and crazy enought to be succesfull. Brian |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
...Add some turn signals, brake lights, etc, and that's it...
Whatever the contraption, could you take it around an obstacle course? To my knowledge there's only one tricycle CAR in the world (it's British). There's a reason. For the added weight, is the solution as simple as adding power? We did this with model rockets - took a little one designed for a 1/4A engine and put a C6-5 in it. The engine went higher than we could track, the fins remained on the launch pad. For the added weight, is the solution as simple as adding power? I'm pretty sure it's already been done. But there's a bit more to it than just taxiing on the street. It needs to be safe on the street. Jose -- Nothing is more powerful than a commercial interest. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
mindenpilot wrote:
OK, you have to humor me on this. I'm not talking about anything unrealistic (like Moller's skycar, etc). But what would prevent a design (even low performance/ultra light to start) that would allow a pilot to fly into an airport, then fold up his wings and cruise down surface streets at 45mph? Just for fun, lets explore this idea some more. Obviously weight is the biggest problem or you could just mount a folding wing, tail feathers and prop to your Honda. The weight of a transmission to drive the wheels directly alone would probably add to much weight to be practical. So you suggested driving it with the prop with some kind of cage around it. If you are going to put a cage around the prop, you might as well make it useful. Make it a pusher prop with a ducted fan instead of a normal simple prop. I think some home builder is working on a design like that. Second have you ever noticed how amazingly horrible the ground handling of every airplane I have ever seen is? To make it road worthy, even if just for non-highway use, you would have to have a more car like suspension. That of course is going to add a significant amount of weight to the machine. One of the reasons airplanes are so unstable on the ground is, by necessity the main wheels need to be pretty close to the CG. I'm not sure you could get good ground handling with out moving the main wheels further from the CG. Tires alone are going add a huge amount of weight, if you try and drive around on typical airplane tires you are going to be replacing them every time you turn around. Finally brakes, you are never going to drive a vehicle like this on the road with out a much better brake system than most airplanes have, and again that is going to add a lot of weight. As another poster so rudely put it, no you can't make up for weight with more horse power. Obviously it can and has been done, but I doubt you will ever see a flying car that can drive or fly very good at all. A much better idea is a flying garage ![]() DC-3, and you have the best of both worlds ![]() -- Chris W Gift Giving Made Easy Get the gifts you want & give the gifts they want http://thewishzone.com "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 Historical Review of Pennsylvania |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Anti-Gravity ?
If there is a will there is a way. I think the only thing keeping it from happening is the cost. There is no way to make it cost efficient at this time. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 19:25:59 -0800, "mindenpilot"
wrote: OK, you have to humor me on this. I'm not talking about anything unrealistic (like Moller's skycar, etc). But what would prevent a design (even low performance/ultra light to start) that would allow a pilot to fly into an airport, then fold up his wings and cruise down surface streets at 45mph? Here is a website describing Moult Taylors Aerocar as well as other types. http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/aircraf.../info/info.htm Corky Scott |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Chris W wrote: Just for fun, lets explore this idea some more. Obviously weight is the biggest problem or you could just mount a folding wing, tail feathers and prop to your Honda. That's pretty much what past attempts at flying cars have done. Google for "aerocar" and "convaircar". For a more current project, head on over to http://www.aerocar.com/ and see the Aerocar 2000. It's pretty much the same concept with a Lotus Elise. One of Molt Taylor's last efforts at a flying car came in the 80s. I think it was called the Aerocar IV and consisted of a Honda CRX with detachable wing and tail assembly. As I recall, that one had a 500 shp turboprop. John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180) |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 15:13:56 GMT, Jose
wrote: ...Add some turn signals, brake lights, etc, and that's it... Whatever the contraption, could you take it around an obstacle course? To my knowledge there's only one tricycle CAR in the world (it's British). There's a reason. Hmmm, a small ATV with a detachable powered chute? You won't get anywhere fast but a big enough chute might carry the thing. Corky Scott |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Here's something like what you are looking for--a roadable vehicle that
can fly. It is a parachute conversion for a Honda Reflex motorcycle. http://www.ultralightnews.com/airven.../flitebike.htm |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
George Patterson writes:
The two approaches I've read about are 1) Have the wings and empennage attach to the car. The car lands, unhooks the assembly, and leaves it at the airport. 2) Use detachable and folding wings and tailfeathers and trailer them. The EAA museum at Oshkosh has one of these on display. A (Lotus) concept car for #1 was on display at Oshkosh a couple years ago. --kyler |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jose writes:
To my knowledge there's only one tricycle CAR in the world (it's British). http://www.3wheelers.com/azlist1.html There's a reason. Laziness? --kyler |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
VP-II wings available in Oregon, USA (Or, "How I was coconuted...") | Roberto Waltman | Home Built | 2 | October 29th 04 04:21 PM |
Charging for Wings safety seminar? | Marty Shapiro | Piloting | 19 | June 23rd 04 05:28 PM |
Stolen "Champ" wings located...from 23,000 feet!! | Tom Pappano | Piloting | 17 | December 15th 03 01:24 PM |
Wings from "Champ" stolen in Oklahoma after emergency landing | Tom Pappano | Piloting | 1 | December 7th 03 05:02 AM |
Folding Wings on a Sonerai II | JR | Home Built | 2 | September 18th 03 12:33 AM |