An answer or just taking our troubles to the sky?

[Jeffrey Travis]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,479167,00.html

 

[A K]

God, I feel like I am reading a Popular Mechanics from 1950.

 

[Joe Turner]

by AdamCKach:

God, I feel like I am reading a Popular Mechanics from 1950.

:lol:

 

[Rodger Tellefson]

God, I feel like I am reading a Popular Mechanics from 1950.

Except that it has come to real life just like the Dick Tracy wrist watch phone. Now if they can make an ST version of it. :banana:

 

[Nelson Atwell]

So if traffic gets backed up on the interstate, you will just see a bunch of these things flying over it? Seems like a nightmare for the FAA. I guess you would also need both a drivers and pilot's license to use one of them. Both a car and plane registration as well? It could be an expensive vehicle to operate.

 

[Michael Cacioppo]

Going to need FAA certified mechanics to work on these. That should be cheap.

 

[Nelson Atwell]

My brother has to have the engine rebuilt on his private plane every 1000 hours. It seems excessive, but then if the engine fails there is no backup. I guess this car will fall under the same rules.

 

[Wes Davis]

They should make this car/plane mandatory with that new parachute safety device that some of the new planes have. Has anyone seen Angelina Jolie's plane? It is about the coolest thing in the sky. Saw a little program about it on Discovery or one of those channels.

 

[Richard L]

I agree with Adam, these things were in all the 1950's Poplular Mechanics magazines back then. The were supposed to be the future of automotive tecknology but never really made any sense. Why would you want to drive anywhere if you could fly and not have to deal with any traffic.



I recently saw a TV show where they changed their strategy on this vehicle. Instead of being a car that flies to avoid traffic cames, it was viewed as a plane that would allow you to fly to another location, and then have a car to use to commute around the new location to save on rental car fees....Overall, still not very practical or economical.



...Rich

 

[TomT]

Monday trivia contest:

There was a tv show back in the early 60's that featured a guy with a car that turned into a plane. It was called an aerocar. What was the name of the show. Todd Z will buy the first one that gets it a steak dinner.

 

[Jeffrey Travis]

There was a tv show back in the early 60's that featured a guy with a car that turned into a plane. It was called an aerocar. What was the name of the show. Todd Z will buy the first one that gets it a steak dinner

Show? It was a movie - Chitty Chitty Bang Bang.



I also believe in Flubber they flew as well.



Ummmm...steak.

 

[TomT]

Nope. It was a TV series. And it was a real vehicle.

 

[Jim Johnson]

I've always thought that flying cars, as envisioned in the 1950s, would never work because too many people can't seem to drive competently in just <I>two</I> dimensions! Can you imagine the carnage that would result from adding the third (vertical) dimension? Scary! :blink:

 

[Dreman]

Flying cars are not going to take the place of rolling cars anytime soon. They just take too much energy to keep them in the air. And what do you do when things get congested? You can't just stop! Especially when a fender bender means a 200 ft drop to the ground!

 

[mookie]

The New Bob Cummings Show!

(I looked it up.):banana:

 

[TomT]

You cheated!

But that's the answer. :banana: