Terrafugia Transition flying car shows up at air show, doesn't fly
By Donald Melanson 
posted Aug 5th 2008 2:19PM
posted Aug 5th 2008 2:19PM
As promised, Terrafugia's Transition flying car recently made its public debut at the AirVenture air show in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, and while it didn't actually fly, it at least looks a whole lot more real than those renders the company had been showing off. Terrafugia has also gotten a bit more specific about the vehicle's specs, with it promising that the Transition's weight will stay under 850 pounds thanks to its carbon fiber body, and that it'll get about 23 mpg from its 100 hp Rotax 912 S engine. Unlike something like the fabled Moller Skycar, however, this one won't do vertical take offs and landings, so you'll either need a really long driveway or access to a runway of some sort. There's also no word on what it'll cost, but Terrafugia says it already has fifty customers awaiting delivery of the vehicle, which the company is promising will happen in 2010. If you're still craving more flying car promises, you can head on past the break for an interview with Terrafugia co-founder Samuel Schweighart courtesy of AVweb.
Headline titles getting predictable, not funny.
Comment didn't say "first", voted up.
(I hate your yellow teeth)
adblock is your friend.
Terrafugly
When are we going to see one of these things actually fly?
Hmm, this is more like a small plane with folding wings than a flying car. If it won't do virticle take off/landings, then what good is it?
What good is it? Well, there's that whole, you know, flying thing.
Frankly a driving plane ism uch more feasible and realistic than a flying car.
Yeah, I'm thinking the same thing. I know some high rise buildings have landing pads but only for choppers. I'm thinking if someone were to make these viable then make it city-safe. Like a hybrid car/chopper, or better yet a van/dirigible hybrid (I can see myself dating someone in a dirigible).
I don't think you can go on a date in a Terrafugia Transition (Hold on honie-bunny g..gotta concentrate on my flying(-∆-)..darn it!)
It does plenty of good, mostly you can travel faster, you get to go in a straight line and pass traffic. I don't think we should exclude a car-plane model from the title of flying car just because we would prefer a car-helicopter model, who is the one that decided it should land and take off vertical (It is still flying). Also, if it were designed after a helicopter it probably wouldn't have the same speed in the air.
(Zempter waits for the arrival of the Flying car, submarine, space shuttle combo...with blasters.)
Cool car.
@Zempter
I'm just thinking ahead about potential dangers. Like:
(1) What about those people that drive drunk, I wouldn't want them flying within city limits if we have a car-plane.
(2) Or what about those people that have 2 strikes on them and go all out on car chases with the cops.
The helicopter and dirigible idea only stems from observations that I see (choppers and blimp) flying within city limits and having a small enough space to land in (assumption). With the car-plane, I think you still have to drive to an airport in order to land/fly, since you need some prime real-estate to get traction. We might not see traffic in the skies but airports would surely be bottlenecke.
"a driving plane is much more feasible and realistic than a flying car."
Yeah, but could you imagine what fender-benders would be like when props are involved?
This would be great. You could drive to your local airport, take off and fly to an airport hundreds of miles away and then drive from that airport to you destination. It would be a lot faster than driving and you don't need to have a car/hangar at each airport or have to rent a hangar or tiedown and car.
Yeah - as a plane, you'd be lugging around the weight of alot of unecessary "car" parts, and as a car, you'd be lugging around uneeded "plane" parts. The concept wouldn't be good at doing either thing well.
A lot of potential, I can see myself driving to SFO or LAX for take off and landings (since I assume flying w/in city limits wouldn't be allowed) and then flying to Las Vegas for an hour and be back for dinner.
However, how can you direct traffic, police traffic, or prevent someone from using it for its intended purposes?
Please enter your license..
Welcome on board Mr. Dallas..
How you doing this morning? Sleep OK?
Fuel level 6.03..Propulsion 2x4...
You have nine points left on your license..
I'll see if I can get some answers out of the guys in the near future (a friend of mine is roommates with the designers).
As for the logistics of "flying from LAX to Vegas" -- I'm sure you'll need some sort of pilots license and communications training. (Ground school, 40 hours training, pass a physical, visual/daylight flight only - according to my boss who has his license.)
Good to know, thanks in advance DJ Dave M.
Yea exactly - grandma jenkins aint gonna be jumping into one of these things and blasting off to the market.
Your going to need a full pilots license.
YMark L Mausou should tell your friends to call me!!! 808 557-6742 for a real design.My first design 20 Years ago is twice as good, and mine has evolved. For all you other idiots that dont belive in the Jetsons get an education,It's time has come,and I'm going to make it happen.
Meet George Jetson......
This whole car/plane idea doesn't make any sense.
It's either a crappy car that can fly and a crappy plane that can drive. It's going to have significant performance issues because it has to pass safety restrictions for road and air. If someone could afford one of these they should just keep their car and get a regular plane. You have to go through the same training process/licensing anyway and you still need to use the aiport. I really don't see any advantage to this.
The advantage is that you don't have to pay $200+/month for hanger space. You probably already have a garage...
Every 5 years some stupidity like this pops up and is forgotten within a day or two. Well, exept the Moller thing that keeps popping up no matter what.
Those wings make for some serious blind spots. Still, this will be THE vehicle to have when the zombies come (and they are coming).
I was at AirVenture this last weekend and saw the display.
From what I understand the company is planning on implementing video cameras in order to see what's behind the vehicle (maybe to the sides too, not sure about that) with a screen in the cockpit.
It's a light plane that you don't have to rent a hangar for, and you don't have to rent a car at the destination either. That might actually be useful under some circumstances.
For some kinds of commuting, for instance, you could drive it to a local or regional airport, convert to fly mode, fly it to the other side of the state, then go back to car mode and drive it 15 minutes to your destination.
Flying cars seem nice until you drive down the highway and notice the mufflers and such on side of the road. Do you really want other people's decrepit cars falling apart while FLYING?
Am I the only one that thinks that most people are too stupid to handle a vehicle in two axes, much less with a third?
I almost get side swiped every day on my commute by some moron on a cell phone and all he has to do is go forward and sideways on a plane..... even taking into account the extra volume of airspace, I still don't think human-controlled flying vehicles are a realistic mode of transportation.
lol!! Thanks Corwin!
I'll admit, I'm the type who gets excited about flying cars and such, but I wouldn't want the average human behind those controls. I can see B. N. Genius trying to send a text through his/her integrated iPhone (cause what good is a product anymore unless your iThingy connects to it?!), accidentally hitting the big red Convert-to-Aeroplane button, and docking with an overpass or innocent moose.
Personally, I'm still waiting for the Moller (love that VTOL). And the correlating lottery ticket.
If you've never been to Oshkosh, I highly recommend it -- even if you don't like airplanes. There's so much gadgetry and futuristic stuff that you may not even notice the planes. And if you do like airplanes, it's unlike anything else in the world.
Flying: the difference between a flying car and a car with wings.
Huge Blind spot when your driving that beast.. You'll have to have some sort of rear view digital display along with something to help you on the road.. haha. Nice concept though..
looks pretty cool to me
taking off would be easy, just hit a semi remote stretch of freeway and accelerate to 100mph or 120 or whatever the take off speed is, I'm sure anyone could find a straight enough section to take off from. Landing... probably much more difficult.
and did anyone else think the interviewer would rather have been anywhere else but there?
Roads? Where we're going we don't need roads.
Aw man.. if i'd ever be lucky enough to fly this thing, i don't think i'd be able to resist honkin it all over the place.. when was the last time you were urged to look up because a flying car came flying over claxoning? Sounds like fun to me!
btw.. it doesn't seem to have wipers, so i wonder how that's gonna work in the rain? And how fast does it drive?
Imagine if the Anonymous Legion of 4chan were blessed with one of these things...we'd be able to take the lulz from the ground up to the sky.
I just hope it that WHEN it finally gets tested in the air, the wings or other parts don't break up into little pieces.
While an excellent and quite seasoned idea, and perhaps in execution with Terrafugia's version, the real problems exists beyond the hype and in the actual real-world capabilities for such an LSA (light-sport aircraft):
What is the payload while fully fueled?
Takeoff and landing data?
What is high alitude performance charts for cities such as Denver or Mexico City?
What is the total cost per mile in air and on ground?
How does this vehicle, beyond the obvious and very cool uniqueness, justify itself for cost when compared to other more conventional aircraft? Obviously the car and aircraft in one combination is a novelty, but I believe I could purchase a EuroFox LSA, a trailer, and a brand new Suburban for less capital outlay AND have more payload, endurance, and range in the performance envelope.
My uncle bought one of the first SmartCar's in Canada and had it imported to Dallas so that he could be the first to own one. As an early adopter, he paid more than double the car's MSRP so that he could enjoy ownership when no one else could. If you have the money and Terrafugia can get past the rigors of FAA certification, then this is quite a unique opportunity for someone to own a unique aircraft that at full wing span could fit into the cargo hold of the Hughes Spruce Goose .
However, if your net yearly income is less than $400,000 or you don't have that pot of gold sitting behind your firewall, check out some of the newer generation LSA's on the market, such as Czech Aircraft Works, EuroFox, or Cessna's new 162 Skycatcher. For those water heads, check out the new amphibious Icon Aircraft LSA....
I don't want to crush the creative beauty of Terrafugia's design. It's cool indeed; as a private pilot, I hope Terrafugia continues to have access to certification and R&D capital to further develop this concept. But for real-world budgeted private pilots, this dream-car offers very little useful payload and requires operation from standard designated airstrips...but still, fun indeed. Best to the innovators at Terrafugia, but I will keep my investment dollars in other opportunities while flying Cessnas!
I agree with Eric, This is more of a driving plane than a driving car. Flying cars are more like advanced hovercrafts with flux capacitors, continuum transfunctioners, and GPS guided missiles.