I saw this machine early in its development and was quite surprised that they designed it with a long drive shaft running from the front engine thought the middle of the cockpit to the rear propeller. It’s well known by all engineers that harmonic vibration of long high speed shafts are big trouble especially in aircraft that require light weight flexible materials. Leave it to the MIT folks to build machines that have no practical purpose
And everybody who thinks a flying car would look like it does in the movies really do need to start thinking logically. A normal car shape doesn't have the right aerodynamic properties for it to fly, which is why they have to change it!
it is ugly, apparently underpowered and not very stable in flight. lets face it the only way it will suceed is for the company to complete several cross country flights stopping at several major airports for high visibility to the public. a 45 second flight of a mayonaise jar at 250 feet and shaking like it was having a seizure and a landing thats questionable aint gonna get it. i bet the pilot had to wear 2 diapers to keep from filling the cabin with poop.
C-172 can't land in over 15knot cross-wind. It's not a "flying car" because it is more of an airplane that barely fits on the road. The airplane glass is more full than the car glass, which is likely almost totally empty.
He landed just after the "4000 ft to go" sign, so he had plenty of roll out, which would be pretty boring to watch anyway.
Yes its ugly, and expensive. But, they already have 50 of them sold, so apparently they have found people not hanging out on youtube to sell it to.
And yeah, it is just a little expensive. For $200,000 you can buy two Skycatchers or a brand new Porsche 997 GT2, but I guess it depends on how often you would use it; it could be really helpful.
Why didn't you show the ground loop or the excursion from the runway at the end? Nice bit of video editing... must have been some drama or you would have showed the complete roll out after landing.
This thing is the lamest thing I have ever seen. For $200k, I'll buy a Cirrus SRS or Evektor Sportstar and a Corvette or Porsche, and won't look like a geek from MIT when I'm sporting either of them....
This thing just doesn't strike me as stable, you can tell by the video....its a little wiggly to correct. I think the idea behind this type of vehicle is great but poorly executed...when we get to the Jetsons type tech then this will be practical and safe. for now people should just stick to the planes and leave this type of amateurish invention stuff to the prototypes.
There's nothing about it that would make it less aerodynamically stable than any other aircraft of similar size. It is going to be quite a small aircraft, which means it will certainly be very responsive to control inputs, but it has plenty of dihedral, and I'm sure the weight and balance are appropriate for a small aircraft.
Well actually there is cause you have to put all the road vehicle parts in there also so you have less aerodynamic surfaces and more unevenly distributed weight due to the fact that you need parts in certain places that a pure AIRcraft would not, so instead of building a machine for whats meant to do you build for what it's meant to be in this case a flying car not a airplane....it's like those submarine\cars there just toys there not good as subs or as cars.
Yeah, looks like it floats a bit, but being the very first flight, the test pilot was likely carrying a bit of extra speed into the flare, just to be safe. I notice the landing gear doesn't appear to have much travel - you don't want to drop that thing hard onto the runway!
I have one it is good
grover5793 3 weeks ago
I saw this machine early in its development and was quite surprised that they designed it with a long drive shaft running from the front engine thought the middle of the cockpit to the rear propeller. It’s well known by all engineers that harmonic vibration of long high speed shafts are big trouble especially in aircraft that require light weight flexible materials. Leave it to the MIT folks to build machines that have no practical purpose
H2Sonics 1 year ago
wow- imagine having hundreds of these noisy things flying overhead...
diesel9331 1 year ago
so this is a plane with a folding wings
vality1 1 year ago
@vality1
It also has a conventional automotive powertrain underneath.
rock3tcat 1 year ago
things why this wont be so easy to put in reality
- it makes a lot of sound
- you need to be able to fly with such a thing which will cost you a lot of money to get the licence,
- these thing will be even more dangerous in an accident then normal vehicles.
DuckPirate 1 year ago
@DuckPirate
this car/plane is made for people with a licence.
the problem today isn't to get from an airport to another airport,
the problem is to get from the airport to your final destination.
you can't take your car with you which means that you have to take a taxi or a bus
pilotdynan 1 year ago
The moment it takes off reminds me of the time my pussy ripped in half and apple juice poured out.
DJFG85 1 year ago
And everybody who thinks a flying car would look like it does in the movies really do need to start thinking logically. A normal car shape doesn't have the right aerodynamic properties for it to fly, which is why they have to change it!
craigsimons1993 2 years ago
it is ugly, apparently underpowered and not very stable in flight. lets face it the only way it will suceed is for the company to complete several cross country flights stopping at several major airports for high visibility to the public. a 45 second flight of a mayonaise jar at 250 feet and shaking like it was having a seizure and a landing thats questionable aint gonna get it. i bet the pilot had to wear 2 diapers to keep from filling the cabin with poop.
clarenceleehall 2 years ago
haha dude take it easy, the company is only a small group of grad students; this isn't a full on corporate endeavor. THey have a LOT of work to do.
tonylove16 2 years ago
its more like a driving plane... not flying ca
r
YungerYungerKope 2 years ago 2
C-172 can't land in over 15knot cross-wind. It's not a "flying car" because it is more of an airplane that barely fits on the road. The airplane glass is more full than the car glass, which is likely almost totally empty.
He landed just after the "4000 ft to go" sign, so he had plenty of roll out, which would be pretty boring to watch anyway.
Yes its ugly, and expensive. But, they already have 50 of them sold, so apparently they have found people not hanging out on youtube to sell it to.
haygoodb 2 years ago
Why did he land so far off the runway, didn't look like he had time to stop?
zmatt 2 years ago
Why it cant be called a flying car?
CaptMoo 2 years ago
Its cool, it can fly, but how come the shape look kind of retard
nerv0582 2 years ago
i think because they're more to it's design usability
willysos 2 years ago
Heh, not the best landing there.
And yeah, it is just a little expensive. For $200,000 you can buy two Skycatchers or a brand new Porsche 997 GT2, but I guess it depends on how often you would use it; it could be really helpful.
Cessnaporsche01 2 years ago
Why didn't you show the ground loop or the excursion from the runway at the end? Nice bit of video editing... must have been some drama or you would have showed the complete roll out after landing.
This thing is the lamest thing I have ever seen. For $200k, I'll buy a Cirrus SRS or Evektor Sportstar and a Corvette or Porsche, and won't look like a geek from MIT when I'm sporting either of them....
stealth916 2 years ago
I doubt this can land in crosswind situation. Its cool nonetheless.
DarkFly3r 2 years ago
Many private planes cannot land in 20-30 knot crosswinds...
Gr8t3rl3g10n 2 years ago
cool
BenAndSam3 2 years ago
This thing just doesn't strike me as stable, you can tell by the video....its a little wiggly to correct. I think the idea behind this type of vehicle is great but poorly executed...when we get to the Jetsons type tech then this will be practical and safe. for now people should just stick to the planes and leave this type of amateurish invention stuff to the prototypes.
areavip 2 years ago
There's nothing about it that would make it less aerodynamically stable than any other aircraft of similar size. It is going to be quite a small aircraft, which means it will certainly be very responsive to control inputs, but it has plenty of dihedral, and I'm sure the weight and balance are appropriate for a small aircraft.
fiidster 2 years ago
Well actually there is cause you have to put all the road vehicle parts in there also so you have less aerodynamic surfaces and more unevenly distributed weight due to the fact that you need parts in certain places that a pure AIRcraft would not, so instead of building a machine for whats meant to do you build for what it's meant to be in this case a flying car not a airplane....it's like those submarine\cars there just toys there not good as subs or as cars.
areavip 2 years ago
It's probably not stable as it appears to be on the edge of stall
contactmag 2 years ago
Awesome, that's all I can say - AWESOME! Will they meet their 2010 deadline? Hope so.
Chubearishere 2 years ago
hasn't this been done already before. i feel that it is just a waste of time and i see more practicality putting a small turbo prop in a hawk.
Point432 2 years ago
Yeah, looks like it floats a bit, but being the very first flight, the test pilot was likely carrying a bit of extra speed into the flare, just to be safe. I notice the landing gear doesn't appear to have much travel - you don't want to drop that thing hard onto the runway!
gsmac1969 2 years ago
It's had 28 test flights so far. I don't think this was the first one.
simkatu 2 years ago
Hopefully soon when certified airworthy, it will appear in a movie with the pilot being.... Bond, James Bond
Neppybutt 2 years ago
lol, it already has. Go watch some old Roger Moore Bond movies and you'll see the Terrafugia in there.
Chubearishere 2 years ago
Looks like its very awkward to land
Jakearoo14 2 years ago
just had too much of an aerodynamic cushion effect upon landing...toomuch speed. lower the landing speed.
KuostA 2 years ago