Flying Car Prototype Gets Airworthiness Certified By FAA (cnn.com) 67
An anonymous reader writes: The Federal Aviation Administration has certified for testing a vehicle that a California startup describes as a flying car -- the first fully electric vehicle that can both fly and travel on roads to receive US government approval. Alef Automotive said that its vehicle/aircraft, dubbed the "Model A," is the first flying vehicle that is drivable on public roads and able to park like a normal car. It also has vertical takeoff and landing capabilities. It apparently will be able to carry one or two occupants and will have a road-range of 200 miles and a flying range of 110 miles.
The company expects to sell the vehicle for $300,000 each with the first delivery by projected for the end of 2025. The FAA confirmed that it has issued the company a special airworthiness certificate, allowing for limited purposes that include exhibition, research and development. Numerous companies are working on all-electric VTOLs, which stands for vehicle takeoff and landing aircraft. The FAA said that Alef is "not the first aircraft of its kind" to get a special airworthiness certificate. However, Alef noted that its vehicle is different because of its ability to function both on roads and in the air, to appear like a normal car and to park in a normal parking space.
The company expects to sell the vehicle for $300,000 each with the first delivery by projected for the end of 2025. The FAA confirmed that it has issued the company a special airworthiness certificate, allowing for limited purposes that include exhibition, research and development. Numerous companies are working on all-electric VTOLs, which stands for vehicle takeoff and landing aircraft. The FAA said that Alef is "not the first aircraft of its kind" to get a special airworthiness certificate. However, Alef noted that its vehicle is different because of its ability to function both on roads and in the air, to appear like a normal car and to park in a normal parking space.
But does it fold into a suitcase? (Score:5, Funny)
Look at the prototype, (Score:2)
Looking at the protoype, it's pretty wild, a rotating cockpit to handle different modes. Also, a tiltrotor system? I'm not seeing any fans or such to power it in the air.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Nothing impressive in those videos except someone's 3D animation and video editing skills. I want to see an ACTUAL prototype flying (even tethered is fine) or at least moving like a car with its own power.
Re: (Score:2)
But is it rea? (Score:3)
I looked into this the last time it was on slashdot (a couple of days ago) and could find no video showing an actual car flying.
Did I miss something? There's no video on their website that I can find, all the ones on youtube are simulations.
Also, looking at the presentation video, the emcee notes that the 1st priority was being "green", and safety was bumped down as priority 4. That's a big red flag to begin with.
This thing just reeks of investment scam. Unless they can show an actual prototype flying arou
Re: (Score:3)
It's hard to image a transforming aircraft like this working out though. It was so many years and so many crashes before they finally got the osprey to work, and that has a less dramatic in-air transition than this thing. And that's for a vehicle with a large amount of funding and a high degree of professional maintenance. I can't picture this thing, wi
Re: (Score:2)
What was stopping them from testing it before?
I think if it actually worked we would've seen it flying with a dummy in the desert somewhere by now. This looks like a pretty dumb and unworkable "flying car"
Re: (Score:2)
What was stopping them from testing it before?
FAA approval. You can't just fly around however you like, even in the desert. Though I think that only applies above a certain (low) altitude. So in principle maybe we could have seen it hovering a few meters up, if it was capable of that.
Re: (Score:2)
Safety isn't the top priority - now where have we recently heard that? Well, if enough people die in these things then the higher-priority environment effect will be realized.
How did they certify it? (Score:4, Insightful)
Can it actually fly? I couldn't find any videos of it flying --tethered or untethered .. or even moving like a car online or on their website. You would think that should be something with lots of videos they would want to show off.
Re: (Score:3)
I think that's the "Certified for Testing" part - which is actually very easy to get. In this case, they aren't allowed to sell seats or ship cargo or anything, only allowed to fly around a bit for actual testing and research purposes.
So we might see that tethered liftoff soon.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that's the "Certified for Testing" part - which is actually very easy to get. In this case, they aren't allowed to sell seats or ship cargo or anything, only allowed to fly around a bit for actual testing and research purposes.
So we might see that tethered liftoff soon.
Exactly. This Special Airworthiness Certificate doesn't even approach what is authorized under the Experimental aircraft category, much less any kind of actual personal or commercial flight operations. It just means they can go to certain far-away private airports and see if they can get the thing in the air. It's for "research". Also, they might be able to "fly" it at some airshow, if the organizers and airport authorities at the show allow it.
The headline makes it sound like they're soon to be booking pas
VTOL? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
I always thought it stood for "Vertical Take Off and Landing"...
You are correct, that's VTOL. "Vertical".
There is also VSTOL, which is "Very Short..."
Some VTOL aircraft (takes off and lands like a helicopter) can also use a runway, if the thing has wings. For example, some tilt-rotors can do that. This allows for greater takeoff weight, because the wings can generate additional lift. That also means you can glide, a little bit anyway. More than "drop out of the sky like a rock and go splat", but might still mean a crash landing.
Re: (Score:2)
A very good landing is one where everyone who walked to the aircraft can walk away from the landing site.
Intermediate is the case where people walk to the aircraft, but, for whatever reason, run from the landing site (or swim as fast as they can - always my #1 aviation concern).
the one big problem (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
There's a reason they're talking $300,000 each.
And, based on the many other "flying car" companies in the past decade or two, that will turn into $600,000 before they actually commit to a delivery date - if they ever do.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know the statistics on that, but anecdotally I take a lot of Ubers/Lyfts in different cities and that's never happened. if they can mimic current airplane safety that is "good enough." I mean, they don't need to make it never break down, they just need it to fail safely 99.99% of the times it does (cars don't have perfect safety either .. if you don't believe me just ask the 40,000 people who die in traffic accidents every year). OK. Anyway, it has a parachute system and presumably if a rotor fails
Re: (Score:2)
"we'd have nothing"
And we will continue to have nothing, because low altitude VFR flight rules in populated areas are pretty damned strict, in terms of what licensing is needed, where they can do it, flight separation (how far laterally and vertically you need to be from everyone else in the air and on the ground, what the weather is (you need visibility and distance from clouds), time of day (no VFR between sunset and sunrise), and on and on and on.
And while IFR lets you fly at night, and through clouds, t
Re: (Score:2)
And the amount of energy required to keep a VTOL in the air
Going to be a bit offtopic here, but that is the same comment I always have when watching a Gundam show. How much energy does it take to life a 40 ton gundam off the ground, let alone have it maneuver in combat. And for extended period of time.
Yes, yes, it's an anime, not real life. I still wonder.
Re: (Score:3)
Now the question is, do you support having these books in childrens libraries. Books that teach little kids to suck your dick? Simple question, yes or no answer.
There is no such book in school libraries. Stop the lying. If you don't want YOUR kid to not read a certain book, then you tell the school YOUR kid can't check out said book. You do not have the right to tell OTHER parents what their kids can or cannot read. Banning books is what the Nazis did. Is that really the road you want to go down?
As for yo
Re: (Score:2)
A VTOL craft has some more potential than any fixed wing conversion craft, but if you think you are going to be lifting off from your driveway and landing at the grocery store parking lot... i doubt it ever happens.
On many places, including Delaware and New Jersey, it is illegal to use a helicopter from anyplace except an authorized airport. I assume this is because there are enough rich people working in New York City that a demand for suburban or mansion pickups/dropoffs is conceivable.
Uber was able to operate illegally in many markets until they could get special laws for ride-share companies passed. They bullied the governments. Somehow, I don't think that's going to work with the local, state, and federal govern
Re: (Score:2)
Well, while I believe the estimate of 200 miles of range on the ground, I'm less believing of 110 miles of range in the air - only 2x the energy for air travel than for ground travel seems way too optimistic. Maybe that's in the ground effect zone (just off the ground)? Even so, that would let you "drive" across lakes, rivers, and canals with boat landings.
I might believe 5x - so 40 miles of air range. Which would be way too restrictive to use this as an "airplane".
BUT - Even with that worse cas
Re: (Score:2)
Hmmm. Some. Not many. The typical balance of air-ambulances to road ambulances is below 1:50 in cities and lower in the country which itself suggests that traffic is the problem, not finding parking.
When there are 50 or 100 aircraft over a city centre, then traffic conges
Re: (Score:2)
ATC at least is easy-peasy. Point to point piloting - with interaction with live ATC operators - at one altitude. OR, a GPS type system - type in your destination and it flies itself. Only one direction at a time - North (at one altitude), East (2nd altitude) South (3rd altitude) and West (4th altitude). Everything separated, everything going in the exact same direction at any one time, in a bank of altitudes excluding every other traffic. No sweat, no collisions, handle tens or hundreds of thousands o
Re: (Score:2)
Your desired flight plan would be of the form :
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, lot to unpack here Rocky (can I call you Rocky?). Kudos for being a pilot!
When describing the grid pattern, it would all be automatic. All aircars travelling at the same speed, in the same direction. Nobody stopping, but slowly pealing out and changing altitude and direction, one at a time, in a virtual 3-D off-ramp to change between levels.
Heck, my car will practically drive itself on the highway - cruise control, keeping distance from other cars, even steering for me to keep me in the lines. Stil
Re: (Score:2)
A
Re: (Score:2)
"only 2x the energy for air travel than for ground travel seems way too optimistic. Maybe that's in the ground effect zone (just off the ground)? "
I'm speculating that its 2 separate power plants / power supplies. Only thing that makes sense to me.
"I see lots of use cases."
The atlanta airport, busiest in the world sees ~66000 flights per *month*. A busy intersection in New York sees 76000 vehicles per day, 140,000 cross the brooklyn bridge each day.
There is no way, there's ever going to be 10s or 100s of th
Re: (Score:2)
Pilots already need to have continuous (or periodic, for amateurs) re-assessment of their flying skills. Drivers don't. Personally, I think that is unduly lenient on "on the ground" drivers - look at their failure rates, with only two dimensions to fuck things up with. 3d-pilot-drivers : yeah, they're going to have to re-sit their certificatio
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know the statistics on that, but anecdotally I take a lot of Ubers/Lyfts in different cities and that's never happened.
More anecdotes: I have been in about four Ubers that broke down. In the middle of the highway. By the way, Uber has no contingency for this. You can't get another Uber to come rescue you, for example. I have also been in about 10 Ubers that ran out of gas.
You know what one of the major causes of General Aviation accidents is? Running out of gas. This is worse than in a car, you understand...
Anyway, these are not going to be "ride share" vehicles like Uber. They are going to simply be the exact same on-deman
Toys for rich people (Score:2)
"The company expects to sell the vehicle for $300,000 each with the first delivery by projected for the end of 2025. "
Which is in the same price range as small private helicopters now, and will come with the same expensive cost of ownership, and the same licensing requirements.
And based on other "flying car" companies' experiences, that price will double before the first unit is delivered, if any ever are. So far, the only thing any of those companies ever seem to actually sell is shares of stock.
Re: (Score:2)
I assume that's on the "penny share" market, home of the dreamers and grifters?
Never having knowingly brought a share in my life, if the company folds up, are the shareholders preferred creditors, or down in the "it's not worth sueing" ream of creditors?
It ain't a car if you need a pilot's license (Score:2)
And good luck getting insurance for this modern version of the flying bedstead [wikipedia.org].
Re: It ain't a car if you need a pilot's license (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you've got the escrowed resources to take a crash landing in city centre - say, $50M in property damage, 100 deaths at $10M each, plus 10 crippled children at $100M each, plus exemplary damages, then you too can fly without insurance. Unless it's a legal necessity, like insurance for your car on the public road.
Of course, you can drive without insurance. On land you own, to which the public don't have access, on a road you built with your own money
Bahubali's war chariot ... (Score:2)
VTOL (Score:1)
Even as an ultralight pilot... no fucking way (Score:2)
I fly self built gyroplanes and ultralights and I would not get in that thing and go higher than I am willing to fall. Every type of aircraft currently out there has the ability to be fully/mostly controllable in the event of an engine outage. To my knowledge nothing that is a drone or built similarly has any ability to do anything but fall when there is an engine outage. Sure you could add more engines/motors, but they are all electric. You MIGHT have a motor failure and lose only one, but if the power del
Re: (Score:2)
You'll never be killed in a crash because the computer detects an engine outage and administers instant-acting euthanasian.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Even as an ultralight pilot... no fucking way (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't call autorotation gliding, but yes, they can fly unpowered.
Depending on what's below you, it's not any scarier than a power-off landing in an airplane. Students do both of those things endlessly.
I did my first auto-rotate-to-the-ground after about 30 minutes of training (although with considerable fixed-wing experience).
Re: (Score:2)
Some years ago, I was trying to organise "stag-day" events for my buddy. Since he likes his flight sims, and our city had 3 simulators (one for each large helicopter company) and the busiest non-milita
Re: (Score:2)
Why so afraid of helicopters?
I pilot them?
And I say a lot of things about "flying cars"...
Re: (Score:2)
I just use the things to get to/ from work, and they scare the shit out of me. It doesn't matter if it's over cold water (die of hypothermia) or warm water (die as shark food), but they're scary things.
I'd average one serious in flight incident (close approach of rotors to metalwork ; loss of engine ; gearbox gushing oil out through the passenger cabin ; too much turbulence) every 3-odd years, and less serious ones (weather makes target unsafe for landing)
Re: (Score:2)
Why so afraid of helicopters?
I'll tell you.
After years of flying fixed-wing, I just had to see what helicopter piloting was like. So I started the add-on training. In my first lesson, having gotten some semblance of controlling a hover, I requested, was shown, and then performed an autorotation to the ground. It was not scary at all.
After we were all done and back inside the hangar. my instructor asked me, "Well, what do you think?" I said: "I'm scared!" He was surprised and said. "You're scared?". I explained. "Yes, I am very scared.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're not a fan of helicopters then, I assume?
No.
Re: (Score:2)
I fly self built gyroplanes and ultralights and I would not get in that thing and go higher than I am willing to fall. Every type of aircraft currently out there has the ability to be fully/mostly controllable in the event of an engine outage. To my knowledge nothing that is a drone or built similarly has any ability to do anything but fall when there is an engine outage. Sure you could add more engines/motors, but they are all electric. You MIGHT have a motor failure and lose only one, but if the power delivery system fails you are going to drop like a rock.
There are single-point failure modes in certificated aircraft. If you lose the "Jesus Bolt" on the rudder of various common 4-place airplanes, you are probably going to die. If you lose the propeller on an airplane, you can still probably control it despite the weight balance change. But if your helicopter sheds a blade, I doubt if you'll have enough left to autorotate with. For that matter, there is a minimum height for any autorotation. They have good seats, but I'm guessing its quadriplegia time, at best
Re: (Score:2)
Shedding the entire rotor disk seems to be more common than losingone (of 4, 5, 6) rotor blade. But that may be a consequence of me having too much experience with ... I think the model number was "AS-225". 5 or 6 separations of rotor disc from gearbox in under 10 years. Ungood. (Still flying, TTBOMK.)
If you hit a solid object with the rotor, you might lose one or more blades, but it's very unlikely that any would
Re: (Score:2)
No, that's a popular canard. But untrue. The collapse load of aircraft seating is designed to be lower than what the spine can support, precisely to reduce spinal injuries. An unintended consequence is that can lead to lower leg injuries if you tuck your legs under the seat. So, don't do that.
I thought I'd better break this point out as distinct from the rest, for emphasis. It is a common lie, dating back to the 1950s and rumours that "brace" positions were
This is clearly just an investment scam (Score:4)
This "milestone" just marks that they have successfully completed the paperwork, nothing more. It does not prove airworthiness or represent any sort of actual engineering or technical achievement. It's just the paperwork. There are so many red flags with this project, I'll only highlight the biggest two:
They claim they can go from CAD model to delivery of a finished and tested production aircraft to customers in 2.5 years? If they were an existing aircraft company and did everything perfectly, they might be approaching first flight by then, but no where close to production.
This "milestone" just marks that they have successfully completed the paperwork, nothing more. It does not prove airworthiness or represent any sort of actual engineering or technical achievement.
I found a presentation (https://youtu.be/38N-KSZJAv8?t=204) from last year where they were claiming you'd only need a Part 107 Drone certificate to fly this. This is absolutely impossible. The first paragraph of section 107 states the rule is specifically for "civil small unmanned aircraft systems," which are defined a few paragraphs later as "an unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds on takeoff, including everything that is on board or otherwise attached to the aircraft." This isn't a mistake, this is an outright lie intended to deceive - there is no possible interpretation of any rule that would allow you to fly this without an actual pilot certificate for manned flight, and in the incredibly unlikely event that the FAA were to propose one today, it would not even be close to being accepted and in effect by the end of 2025. The Sport Pilot certificate took 10 years to get passed, and that only made relatively minor changes to the rules. What they're "expecting" is a massive change to pilot training, on a relatively new type of manned aircraft, with little testing and no data to support any of their claims, all done in a historically unheard-of time frame. They have to know every bit of this is bullshit.
This screams MBA pump and dump project. Run far away, you'd be better off burning your money than investing, at least you'd get some heat in return.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As a follow up, I tried to look up the company founders.
One does have a PhD, but it is in chemical engineering.
Two of them didn't have any information either on their website or in the press about any relevant experience, or any job history I could find. One may have been a software developer, but it's not clear. I couldn't get to LinkedIn, so maybe more is there.
The CEO was a software developer, DJ, event producer, and "serial entrepreneur".
Most people, including the FAA and NHTSA, prefer commercial aircra
I'm as excited for this as I was for the Moller (Score:2)
It'll be here any day now, I'm sure, they just need a tiny bit more funding.
When is a car not a car? (Score:2)
When it doesn't meet the crash regs etc.
Need a pilot license for it? (Score:2)
I seldom here if craft like this needs a pilot license. You can't just land a plane to a random airport, you have to book the landing and storage last time I checked. Flight takeoff should be done from an airport too, even a small airport.
LOL. It's a quadcopter with some body molding. (Score:2)
Worst of both .... (Score:2)
It is a car you daren't drive because any slight ding means you can't fly ...
It will be a poor car, and a poor plane, that you can only fly between airports ... and you need two licences to do so
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, you missed that all repairs will have to be done to aviation standards, not car standards.