Here are 2 videos representing different concepts on what a flying car may be in our future. Both are working prototypes.

Watch Terrafugia's Transition fly and drive in public for the first time (video) (http://www.engadget.com/2013/07/31/terrafugia-transition-first-public-flight-video/)

PAL-V Flying Car - Maiden Flight (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IG9e-2ELJ-8)

Flying cars are so '80s science fiction. I think the future is far more local with high speed rail linking cities. Flying cars are simply impractical.

Flying cars are like 1930s science fiction.

From the ones that have been made in the past, it generally turns out they have tended to be too heavy to be good airplanes and too light to have a good ride on roads (imagine every bump in the road magnified several times).

I could see them eliminating the to heavy to be a good aircraft eventually and it just have the feature of being able to drive once you get to the destination but even without all the technical problems to try and get good performance in both modes, you still end up with a vehicle that is going to be much more expensive than a car and you have to be a trained pilot to fully utilize. It may even be more expensive than just renting a car a the airport, which is generally possible at fairly small airports, some even have courtesy cars available.

Way too costly, impractical, most folks lack the intellectual moxy to learn to safely fly anyway. We have way too many 5 gallon drivers in 25 gallon vehicles now.

People have wanted to combine these two incompatible technologies. Owning a car that flies doesn't give non-pilots the legal right to do so. It requires a pilot certificate, type rating, current medical certificate, BFR, currency (3 T/O & landing within 90 days), an airport and insurance. The first six are easy, but I wonder if there's an insurer willing to underwrite the risk.

For that money you could almost buy a Tesla and a used SR-22.

Cars are more likely to be like I, Robot (self driving) than Back to the Future II (flying).

Cars are more likely to be like I, Robot (self driving) than Back to the Future II (flying).

Thats not always good as was the case of that 777 plane crash a few weeks ago. The FAA has just made a decision where airports have to keep their autopilot landings systems always running. So apparently actually landing a plane manually isn't a major requirement for pilots for overseas airlines. crazy


We need a new source of energy and antigravity for the real Back to the Future cars. lol

Could you imagine how many carplain crashes there would be with people simply running out gas. Look how many cars are already sitting on the side of the road on any give trip down the interstate. Now imagine those cars just falling out of the sky. On the plus side, it would add some interest to the homeless looking guys at gas stations that alway tell me they just ran out of gas down the street and need a few dollars to get some gas (as if they ran out of gas on the way to the gas station that they don't even have money to buy in the first place). In the future of flying cars I can say, "Oh really - and you survived the crash landing?"

However - this has me intrigued.

http://www.businessinsider.com/flying-bike-kickstarter-project-2013-8

K9_mtF8rXiU

http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/AccidentReports/yixk1y45o5zi2urfjgjzv0mq1/R08022013120000.pdf

Cessna 421 crash in Tulsa three years ago due to fuel exhaustion. Killed the pilot and both passengers.

We have enough wrecks moving in two dimensions. Just imagine if you added a thrid dimension. I don't see flying cars happening anytime soon. Not until human error can be mostly removed from the equation. Even then it still may not be a major mode of transportation. A fender bender on the road may cost several hundred dollars. A fender bender in the sky may cost you your life.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-4IGv6_4imK0/T3A88RHkhGI/AAAAAAAACPg/n3lcrqTFz_o/s1600/where-were-going-we-dont-need-roads.jpg