Carplane Developers Criticize BiPod…and Burt responds

[Eric Witherspoon]

One that I think has some shot at success is the Maverick. Because rather than creating an airplane hobbled by roadgoing requirements, they made a kick-butt dune buggy and put a soft (read very light, very easy to stow) wing on it. Their design concept is intentionally NOT to cater to someone wanting to "park an airplane in their garage at home and drive it to the airport".

I think the concept of a relatively capable off-road / unimproved road vehicle that can get up in the air in a small area for a short hop either to cross an otherwise uncrossable obstacle or to just get up a little for a look around is much more likely to see some commercial success than anything attempting to run on paved roads with traffic. EXTREMELY impressive was that they DROVE it from Florida to Oshkosh in 2010 (not sure what they did in 2011, but they were there again).

For any of the other "flying cars" out there, the market, at least to me, is completely unclear - millionaire who has everything? The whole land-it-and-drive-under-the-weather idea seems like a dead-end - especially if your "flying car" is LSA - I'm not flying my LSA unless the weather is well into VFR.

[VTOL Qwerty]

The Helodyne website (www.Helodyne.com) on their FAQ page has a different twist on roadable aircraft concerns, getting through the "gate" at the airport, especially if it isn't you local airport, for which you have a pass/permit for (www.Helodyne.com/Helodyne-FAQ.html).

I know at one of our local airports, if you didn't have a security badge and you land after say 6:00 pm, you could be there awhile.

I prefer amphibious VTOL, let's go direct door-to-door, or direct door-to-boat dock.

[teknosmurf]

As an engineer, I think Burt has the right idea regarding his policy to keep his mouth shut and not respond to these kinds of things. The German company is just trying to gain some kind of marketing advantage from a "competitor" and is probably just talking out their rear-end. If I were in Burts shoes, I would not release enough info for another company to make educated guesses about my design until it was ready for market. The fact that the German company is trying to outguess another company (and Burt of all people) shows how desparate they are for attention to their own product.

I think it's time for this other company to put-up or shut-up if they are going to go down this path, and Burt can just sit back and bask in the glory that he has already created.

Just my $0.02

[roadable]

I've been a long time roadable airplane/flying car enthusiast. I am also an 800 hour pilot. A walk-around preflight inspection before flight is paramount to me. The push-of-a-button wing deployment idea drives me crazy though I am aware that navy planes get away with it. One fatal flying car accident occurred at the EAA fly-in I believe in 1974. Leland Bryan drove his roadable on to the Oshkosh runway, unfolded his wings without a preflight inspection, commenced a takeoff and the wing folded killing him. http://roadabletimes.com/roadables-integ_bryan.html

Another concern that comes to mind are government funded companies. The Zoche diesel engine was/is funded by the German government. It still has not become an available product with first runs back in 1995 I think. There was a rumor that motivation was lacking when there was government money coming in. I can't help wonder the same about this company. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...8114203AAzASLW

I love this subject and I sure hope someone develops a product that minimizes the compromise between road and air travel to make it economically viable. I fully support and encourage anyone who achieves (or even tries to achieve) this goal. I am impressed the way Terrafugia is getting some of the rules changed creating their own catagory. My hat is off to them. http://www.terrafugia.com/ .....but they still have that push-button-wing-deployment thing....

Dan Kreigh

[flybuddy]

One thing worth mentioning is that Scaled's car is the first that actually aims toward reasonably good performance. Cars that go faster on the ground than they can in the air are just gimmicks.

[spungey]

Anyone have any thoughts, criticisms, or words of encouragement around the switchblade? http://www.samsonmotorworks.com/

[rosiejerryrosie]

Anyone have any thoughts, criticisms, or words of encouragement around the switchblade? http://www.samsonmotorworks.com/

Wonder what the wing loading is????

[Switchblade Man]

Sure! The wind tunnel testing at U of Washington was completed in April and came out even better than expected. A new tail design exceeded stability targets and cut drag about 7%. All in all, looks like this baby will fly great! And drive great and look cool too! About time a practical "flying car" came along.

[Switchblade Man]

Anyone have any thoughts, criticisms, or words of encouragement around the switchblade? http://www.samsonmotorworks.com/

Wing loading for he Switchblade will be about 26 lbs. The body pretty big and roomy. Makes the wings look deceptively small, but wingspan is actually 26 feet

[Nick Whiley]

Burt Rutan is claiming his 40hp, 2-seat motor-glider does 200mph at 12,000ft. Has anyone besides me here ever flown a 40hp motor-glider?? Hmmm. I'm a huge fan of Burt Rutan, but if I'm reading the figures right the concerns raised in John Brown's post have some credibility.

The comparison between the two projects is difficult. I've been following Carplane since 2008 and if you examine the Carplane website you'll see how mature the project is. The Rutan Bi-Pod is a concept vehicle at a much earlier stage of development. How about we try looking at the projects on their own merits, rather than dismissing one because the inventor hasn't flown around the world on a single tank? I guess everyone probably told Burt Rutan he was crazy when he showed the audacity to do the Voyager project. Let's encourage new inventors who let's face it are doing things us regular mortals couldn't do. We live in an exciting era for aviation.