Boeing's flying car lifts off in race to revolutionize urban travel

Boeing Co said on Wednesday its flying car prototype hovered briefly in the air during an inaugural test flight, a small but significant step as the world’s largest planemaker bids to revolutionize urban transportation and parcel delivery services.

Boeing is competing with arch-rival Airbus SE and numerous other firms to introduce small self-flying vehicles capable of vertical takeoff and landing.

The investments, fueled by leaps in autonomous technology as much as frustration with road congestion, could change the face of the aerospace industry within the next decade.

Boeing’s 30-foot-long (9 meter) aircraft - part helicopter, part drone and part fixed-wing plane - lifted a few feet off the ground and made a soft landing after less than a minute of being airborne on Tuesday at an airport in Manassas, Virginia, Boeing said.

Future flights will test forward, wing-borne flight.

This is not the flying car I have been hoping for all these years, but I will take it. Make it safe and affordable and I will buy one.

a reply to: LookingAtMars

That is just silly.

Now you need a hanger rather than a garage.

The whole flying car thing is just so much nonsense.

Think what happens if just one has a mechanical problem and falls out of the air.

How many others would it hit let alone when one crashes into a school or a hospital.

Only for the rich and powerful.

Chaos is the air. How does one do a u turn?

How does one tell if another vehicle is beneath you.

So many crashes possible.

P

a reply to: pheonix358

It seems a car or 18 wheeler would do just as much (or more) damage if it crashed into a school or a hospital. Networked, swarm tech would solve many of the problems you mention.

a reply to: LookingAtMars

I was contemplating the concept of flying cars just the other day, and it scares me. It would almost certainly need to be automated. But we're a long way off from automating thousands and thousands of vehicles communicating with one another en masse without problems. A single glitch across any system would seemingly be catastrophic. I can't even get steady internet without a few crashes a month...

That said, the idea is pretty cool. I just think it's a pipe dream for it to happen in this century.

a reply to: sine.nomine

What you bring up sounds a lot like self driving cars and they are closer to being set free than most think.

originally posted by: LookingAtMars
a reply to: sine.nomine

What you bring up sounds a lot like self driving cars and they are closer to being set free than most think.

That's exactly what I was referring to, and there's been multiple crashes with less than a dozen on the road. Think of the complexities of air traffic control. Now keep that in the mix but add 100's of millions of aerial personal transport vehicles. That would have to be automated otherwise a fender bender could bring down a skyscraper. Now think of problems with software issues, hardware issues, competing companies with different technology, etc all flying in the same airspace. That's a long long way off. Not to mention if there were problems with the electric grid itself, or the system got overloaded and failed. It'd be massive death and carnage.

Too big- humans are too expensive to transport in the sky to make it viable.

Can you imagine how much insurance will cost to insure one of those for liability. They have problems with drones at airports, how about these flying cars and near misses. Home owners insurance will jump up since the home owners insurance will be covering your damage until the plane insurance pays, that could take a year to go through courts. When a car goes through a building here, it takes a long time for the insurance companies to figure out who is going to pay for the damage sometimes. So approval on the repair job can take a long time, I used to do contracting, I know all about this kind of stuff.

a reply to: LookingAtMars

Biggest problem would be filling the tank. How many people can afford 5000.00 a week in fuel costs.

a reply to: LookingAtMars

I wonder how much one would cost initially?

originally posted by: LookingAtMars
a reply to: pheonix358

It seems a car or 18 wheeler would do just as much (or more) damage if it crashed into a school or a hospital. Networked, swarm tech would solve many of the problems you mention.

18 wheeler does not fly in air above buildings, it on purpose built road.

Mainly a PR release. Traffic in 2D is bad enough. In 3D, with gravity aiding disaster, we are a long way from this. Costs will be very high and surface roads will still have to be maintained for the majority who cannot afford flight. At 30 feet long, we will have to greatly increase the size of parking places plus allowing for landing drift.

A combo of a helo and light plane, this is just a possible rich man's toy.

a reply to: LookingAtMars

I don't get it with all this fuss making new machines to fly... why not just stick to copters and small by-planes? What's the big difference? This one in the OP doesn't even drive like a car once you've landed.

Well. it does fly. And it does act as a carriage for people.

But a flying car it is not. It's harriet car...

"Hey guys, lets make a flying car, we'll give it wings, and make it take off vertically, and then, for all intent and purpose, it's a plane. But we'll call it a flying car."

Can't see anyone cruising down the boulevard on a friday night, arm hanging out the window, slicked bryll cream hair, the smell of old spice catching fragments of the breeze as they slowly roll, saying "hey, sweetheart.. how YOU doin'?" to hot chicks in tight, short skirts, giggling and covering their mouths as they do, in one of those..

god damn it it's 2019, I'm living in the 80's man... the 80's...